This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (5)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Venous Thromboembolism  • Cardiovascular System  • Pulmonary Diseases  • Pulmonary Diseases, Other  • Radiologic Imaging  • Angiology  • Computed Tomography  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Too Much of a Good Thing?

Jeffrey Glassroth, MD

JAMA. 2007;298(23):2788-2789.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

The study by Anderson and colleagues¹ in this issue of JAMA convincingly demonstrates that computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is not inferior to ventilation-perfusion (/) lung scanning for the exclusion of pulmonary embolism (PE). Confirmation on this point is comforting because CTPA has had a wide range of sensitivities reported for detection of PE² but nevertheless has largely supplanted /scanning for several years for this purpose.³

This study is also notable for a number of additional reasons. First, the investigators' study design and management algorithms use D-dimer testing,⁴ structured pretest probability (of PE) assessment,⁵ and venous ultrasound of the lower extremities to identify deep venous thrombosis. In essence, the study represented a unique head-to-head comparison of / scanning and CTPA conducted in a manner that duplicated real-world best-practice conditions. Moreover, because this was a multicenter randomized study with a large number of participants, these . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Author Affiliations: Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Evaluation of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy
Mark D. Siegel
JAMA. 2008;299(14):1665.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Computed Tomographic Pulmonary Angiography vs Ventilation-Perfusion Lung Scanning in Patients With Suspected Pulmonary Embolism: A Randomized Controlled Trial
David R. Anderson, Susan R. Kahn, Marc A. Rodger, Michael J. Kovacs, Tim Morris, Andrew Hirsch, Eddy Lang, Ian Stiell, George Kovacs, Jon Dreyer, Carol Dennie, Yannick Cartier, David Barnes, Erica Burton, Susan Pleasance, Chris Skedgel, Keith O’Rouke, and Philip S. Wells
JAMA. 2007;298(23):2743-2753.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evaluation of Suspected Pulmonary Embolism During Pregnancy
Siegel
JAMA 2008;299:1665-1665.
FULL TEXT  

CT-A Outperforms V/Q Scan for Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism
JWatch Emergency Med. 2008;2008:1-1.
FULL TEXT  

What Is the Best Approach to Diagnosing Pulmonary Embolism?
JWatch General 2008;2008:6-6.
FULL TEXT