MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416450009 · doi:10.1186/s43055-025-01630-x

Unilateral VQ mismatch from pulmonary embolism detected on VQ scintigraphy with SPECT/CT: a case report

2025· article· en· W4416450009 on OpenAlexaff
Xavier Rabbath, Yousif A. Lucinian, Vincent Forget, Peter George Maliha

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScintigraphyPulmonary embolismLungDifferential diagnosisComputed tomography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background We describe a case of unilateral whole-lung VQ mismatch caused by a right main pulmonary artery PE, equivocal on pseudoplanar VQ scintigraphy, highly suspected on VQ SPECT/CT scintigraphy and confirmed on CT angiography. This case confirms the well-established notion that SPECT and SPECT/CT provide significant improvement in diagnostic performance compared to planar imaging in such cases. Case presentation Pseudoplanar VQ scintigraphy identified a unilateral right lung VQ mismatch and was doubtful on the presence of a left-sided subsegmental mismatch, ultimately equivocal for pulmonary embolism given the vast differential of unilateral VQ mismatches. SPECT allowed for definitive identification of a contralateral lung VQ segmental mismatch, and low-dose CT did not reveal an alternative diagnosis to explain the unilateral right-sided whole-lung VQ mismatch. Conclusion In our case, pseudoplanar imaging alone was insufficient to make a certain diagnosis of PE. However, SPECT confirmed a significant contralateral lung VQ mismatch and low-dose CT did not reveal an alternate cause of the VQ mismatch, together highly suggestive of PE, supporting the potentially added value of SPECT and CT in such cases.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

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.

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

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear MedicineSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207