MétaCan
← all works

Multidetector Computed Tomography for Acute Pulmonary Embolism

2006· article· en· 1,646 citations· W2115055475 on OpenAlex· 10.1056/nejmoa052367

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Machine scores (provisional)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread
0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of multidetector computed tomographic angiography (CTA) for the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism has not been determined conclusively. METHODS: The Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis II trial was a prospective, multicenter investigation of the accuracy of multidetector CTA alone and combined with venous-phase imaging (CTA-CTV) for the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism. We used a composite reference test to confirm or rule out the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. RESULTS: Among 824 patients with a reference diagnosis and a completed CT study, CTA was inconclusive in 51 because of poor image quality. Excluding such inconclusive studies, the sensitivity of CTA was 83 percent and the specificity was 96 percent. Positive predictive values were 96 percent with a concordantly high or low probability on clinical assessment, 92 percent with an intermediate probability on clinical assessment, and nondiagnostic if clinical probability was discordant. CTA-CTV was inconclusive in 87 of 824 patients because the image quality of either CTA or CTV was poor. The sensitivity of CTA-CTV for pulmonary embolism was 90 percent, and specificity was 95 percent. CTA-CTV was also nondiagnostic with a discordant clinical probability. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with suspected pulmonary embolism, multidetector CTA-CTV has a higher diagnostic sensitivity than does CTA alone, with similar specificity. The predictive value of either CTA or CTA-CTV is high with a concordant clinical assessment, but additional testing is necessary when the clinical probability is inconsistent with the imaging results.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

The record

Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Topic
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Field
Medicine
Canadian institutions
University of Calgary
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
Keywords
MedicinePulmonary embolismRadiologyPre- and post-test probabilityProspective cohort studyComputed tomographic angiographyComputed tomography angiographyAngiographyPredictive value of testsPulmonary angiographyMultidetector computed tomographyPositive predicative valuePredictive valueComputed tomographyInternal medicine
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes