Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2023; 123(07): 700-713
DOI: 10.1055/a-1986-8878
Stroke, Systemic or Venous Thromboembolism

Diagnostic Accuracy of V/Q and Q SPECT/CT in Patients with Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Alessandro Squizzato 
1   Research Center on Thromboembolic Disorders and Antithrombotic Therapies, ASST Lariana, University of Insubria, Como, Italy
,
Alice Venturini
2   Internal Medicine Residency Program, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese and Como, Italy
,
Valentina Pelitti
2   Internal Medicine Residency Program, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese and Como, Italy
,
Beatrice Bellini
2   Internal Medicine Residency Program, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese and Como, Italy
,
Matteo Bernasconi
3   Internal Medicine Unit, ASST Sette Laghi, Cittiglio, Italy
,
Tommaso Depalo
4   Nuclear Medicine Unit, ‘Sant’Anna' Hospital, ASST Lariana, Como, Italy
,
Angelo Corso
4   Nuclear Medicine Unit, ‘Sant’Anna' Hospital, ASST Lariana, Como, Italy
,
Nicoletta Riva 
5   Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints


Abstract

Background Computed tomography (CT) pulmonary angiography has simplified the diagnostic approach to patients with clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism (PE), but alternative imaging tests are still advocated. We aimed to systematically assess the diagnostic accuracy of ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) and Q single-photon emission CT combined with low-dose CT (SPECT/CT) for PE diagnosis.

Methods Studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of SPECT/CT for the diagnosis of acute PE were systematically searched in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases (up to August 2022). The QUADAS-2 tool was used for risk-of-bias assessment of the primary studies. A bivariate random-effects regression approach was used for summary estimates of both sensitivity and specificity. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42021276538.

Results Eight studies, for a total of 1,086 patients, were included. The risk of bias of all included studies was high. The weighted mean prevalence of PE was 27.1% at the random-effects model. The SPECT/CT bivariate weighted mean sensitivity was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 93–98%), with a bivariate weighted mean specificity of 95% (95% CI: 90–97%). At subgroup analysis, for V/Q SPECT/CT bivariate weighted mean sensitivity and specificity were 96% (95% CI: 89–98%) and 96% (95% CI: 91–99%), while for Q SPECT/CT they were 96% (95% CI: 92–98%) and 84% (95% CI: 66–93%), respectively.

Conclusion V/Q SPECT/CT has high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of acute PE, meanwhile Q SPECT/CT has high sensitivity but limited specificity for the diagnosis of PE. Management studies will conclusively ascertain the actual role of SPECT/CT in the diagnostic workup of patients with suspected acute PE.

Keywords

SPECT - pulmonary embolism - diagnosis - sensitivity and specificity - systematic review - meta-analysis

Authors' Contribution

A.S., A.V., and N.R. were responsible for the conception and design of the study. A.V., V.P., and B.B. acquired the data. N.R. performed the statistical analysis. All authors interpretated the data, drafted the manuscript, made critical revisions of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and provided the final approval of the manuscript.




Publication History

Received: 29 March 2022

Accepted: 23 November 2022

Accepted Manuscript online:
24 November 2022

Article published online:
31 January 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Cohen AT, Agnelli G, Anderson FA. et al; VTE Impact Assessment Group in Europe (VITAE). Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in Europe. The number of VTE events and associated morbidity and mortality. Thromb Haemost 2007; 98 (04) 756-764
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Konstantinides SV, Meyer G, Becattini C. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS). Eur Heart J 2020; 41 (04) 543-603
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Stein PD, Fowler SE, Goodman LR. et al; PIOPED II Investigators. Multidetector computed tomography for acute pulmonary embolism. N Engl J Med 2006; 354 (22) 2317-2327
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Wiener RS, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. Time trends in pulmonary embolism in the United States: evidence of overdiagnosis. Arch Intern Med 2011; 171 (09) 831-837
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Wiener RS, Schwartz LM, Woloshin S. When a test is too good: how CT pulmonary angiograms find pulmonary emboli that do not need to be found. BMJ 2013; 347: f3368
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Jaff MR, McMurtry MS, Archer SL. et al; American Heart Association Council on Cardiopulmonary, Critical Care, Perioperative and Resuscitation, American Heart Association Council on Peripheral Vascular Disease, American Heart Association Council on Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology. Management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism, iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2011; 123 (16) 1788-1830 Erratum in: Circulation. 2012 Aug 14;126(7):e104. Erratum in: Circulation. 2012 Mar 20;125(11):e495. PMID: 21422387
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Squizzato A, Rancan E, Dentali F. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of lung ultrasound for pulmonary embolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thromb Haemost 2013; 11 (07) 1269-1278
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Schillaci O. Hybrid SPECT/CT: a new era for SPECT imaging?. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32 (05) 521-524
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Simanek M, Koranda P. The benefit of personalized hybrid SPECT/CT pulmonary imaging. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2016; 6 (04) 215-222
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Roach PJ, Gradinscak DJ, Schembri GP, Bailey EA, Willowson KP, Bailey DL. SPECT/CT in V/Q scanning. Semin Nucl Med 2010; 40 (06) 455-466
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bajc M, Schümichen C, Grüning T. et al. EANM guideline for ventilation/perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism and beyond. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2019; 46 (12) 2429-2451
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Elojeimy S, Cruite I, Bowen S, Zeng J, Vesselle H. Overview of the novel and improved pulmonary ventilation-perfusion imaging applications in the era of SPECT/CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016; 207 (06) 1307-1315
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Le Roux PY, Robin P, Tromeur C. et al. Ventilation/perfusion SPECT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a systematic review. J Thromb Haemost 2020; 18 (11) 2910-2920
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD. et al; and the PRISMA-DTA Group. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA 2018; 319 (04) 388-396 Erratum in: JAMA. 2019 Nov 26;322(20):2026. PMID: 29362800
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME. et al; QUADAS-2 Group. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155 (08) 529-536
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 16 Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J. et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, version 6.1 (updated September 2020): Cochrane 2020. Accessed December 21, 2022 at: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
    PubMed
  • 17 Reitsma JB, Glas AS, Rutjes AW, Scholten RJ, Bossuyt PM, Zwinderman AH. Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58 (10) 982-990
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Harbord RM, Whiting P. Metandi: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical logistic regression. Stata J 2009; 9: 211-229
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Fagan TJ. Letter: Nomogram for Bayes theorem. N Engl J Med 1975; 293 (05) 257
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Deeks JJ, Macaskill P, Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed. J Clin Epidemiol 2005; 58 (09) 882-893
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Singh H, Bhattacharya A, Mittal B. Hybrid SPECT/CT augmented lung perfusion scintigraphy for diagnosis of pulmonary thromboembolism: assessment of superiority over conventional planar imaging and comparative evaluation of interpretation criteria (Modified PIOPED II and PISAPED). J Nucl Med 2019; 60 (Suppl 1): 1425
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Martins GH, Souza TF, Oliveira FR. et al. Head-to-head comparison of V/Q SPECT/CT and multidetector CT angiography for the detection of pulmonary embolism. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2018; 45 (Suppl 1): S1-S844
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Zhao Q, Yang H, Zhu X, Wang R. Comparison of SPECT/CT V/Q scan, CTPA & clinical probability of pulmonary embolism. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (Suppl 1): 514
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Montecalvo N, Goldbach A, Ramakrishnan K, Dadparvar S. Comparison SPECT/CT perfusion/ventilation lung scan to CTPA and to D-dimer studies in evaluation of patients with acute pulmonary embolism: 5 year experience. J Nucl Med 2018; 59 (Suppl 1): 1565
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Montecalvo N, Goldbach A, McLarney R, Hota P, Dadparvar S. SPECT/CT vs ctpa and d-dimer in evaluation of acute pulmonary embolism. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2018; 197: A3765 MeetingAbstracts.
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Naydenska S, Zlatareva D, Stancheva B. et al. Diagnostic value of perfusion lung scintigraphy in SPECT/CT and computed tomography pulmonary angiography for detection of pulmonary embolism. Eur Respir J 2017; 50: PA2358
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Costa FS, Chambi A, Azevedo J. et al. Reduction of inconclusive results in the evaluation of pulmonary embolism with ventilation and perfusion lung scintigraphy using SPECT-CT. Experience of a tertiary cardiology hospital. J Nucl Med 2017; 58 (Suppl 1): 1011
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Maleki R, Ones T, Oksuzoglu K, Inanir S, Turoglu HT, Erdil TY. Comparison between ventilation-perfusion SPECT/CT and ventilation-perfusion quotient results. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44 (2 Suppl 1): S830-S831
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Tzonevska A, Shindov M, Yaneva M. Lung perfusion scintigraphy with SPECT-CT for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42 (1 Suppl 1): S805
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Bathia K, Ambati C, Dhaliwal R, Ho B, Hsu E, Emmett L. SPECT V/Q with Low-Dose CT vs CTPA for diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: final results. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2015; 59 (Suppl 1): 1-37
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Pipikos T, Vlachou F, Nikaki A, Gogos K, Dalianis K, Prassopoulos V. SPECT/low dose CT perfusion study in the assesment of pulmonary embolism. Comparison with V/Q scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41 (Suppl 2): S403
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Mazurek A, Dziuk M, Piszczek S, Stembrowicz-Nowakowska Z, Gizewska-Krasowska A. Lung scintigraphy performed on SPECT/CT hybrid cameras in pulmonary embolism diagnostic. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 40 (Suppl 2): S292
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Bathia K, Paschkewitz R, Lee J, Ho B, Emmett L. SPECT V/Q with low dose CT for pulmonary embolus: Should it supersede CTPA?. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2013; 57 (Suppl 1): 1-44
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Bosio G, Bertagna F, Bertoli M. et al. Evolution of pulmonary perfusion scintigraphy acquisition protocols: Planar vs SPECT/CT study. Clin Transl Imaging 2013; 1 (Suppl 1): S132-S133
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Lang O, Kunikova I, Sprindrich J. Comparison of lung perfusion SPECT/low dose CT with MDCT pulmonary angiography. J Nucl Med 2010; 51 (Suppl 2): abs 1664
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Lu Y, Schoder H. Comparison of non-contrast perfusion SPECT-CT and planar V/Q lung scintigraphy in diagnosing acute pulmonary embolism in patients with contraindications for CT angiography. J Nucl Med 2010; 51 (Suppl 2): abs 39
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Mortensen J, Gutte H, Jensen CV. et al. Detection of pulmonary embolism with pulmonary MDCT-angiography or ventilation/perfusion SPECT combined with low-dose CT. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (Suppl 2): 117
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Ravel C, Poisson T, Revel A. et al. SPECT/CT imaging of lung perfusion in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: comparison with planar ventilation-perfusion lung scintigraphy. Med Nucl (Paris) 2008; 32 (06) 313-322
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Tan TH, Ismail R. Utility of lung perfusion SPECT/CT in detection of pulmonary thromboembolic disease: outcome analysis. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2023; 57 (01) 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Ling IT, Naqvi HA, Siew TK, Loh NK, Ryan GF. SPECT ventilation perfusion scanning with the addition of low-dose CT for the investigation of suspected pulmonary embolism. Intern Med J 2012; 42 (11) 1257-1261
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Milà M, Bechini J, Vázquez A. et al. Acute pulmonary embolism detection with ventilation/perfusion SPECT combined with full dose CT: What is the best option?. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2017; 36 (03) 139-145
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Gutte H, Mortensen J, Jensen CV. et al. Detection of pulmonary embolism with combined ventilation-perfusion SPECT and low-dose CT: head-to-head comparison with multidetector CT angiography. J Nucl Med 2009; 50 (12) 1987-1992
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Mazurek A, Dziuk M, Witkowska-Patena E, Piszczek S, Gizewska A. The utility of hybrid SPECT/CT lung perfusion scintigraphy in pulmonary embolism diagnosis. Respiration 2015; 90 (05) 393-401
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Martins GH, Contardi EB, Lopes DM. et al. Head-to-head comparison of ventilation/perfusion single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography and multidetector computed tomography angiography for the detection of acute pulmonary embolism in clinical practice. Perfusion 2023; 38 (03) 637-644
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Lu Y, Lorenzoni A, Fox JJ. et al. Noncontrast perfusion single-photon emission CT/CT scanning: a new test for the expedited, high-accuracy diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism. Chest 2014; 145 (05) 1079-1088
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Bhatia KD, Ambati C, Dhaliwal R. et al. SPECT-CT/VQ versus CTPA for diagnosing pulmonary embolus and other lung pathology: pre-existing lung disease should not be a contraindication. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2016; 60 (04) 492-497
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Thanuja M, Maimanah M, Sara U. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a comparison between ventilation/perfusion SPECT/CT and perfusion-only SPECT/CT. Med J Malaysia 2020; 75 (05) 490-493
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Yildirim N, Genc M. The efficiency of hybrid perfusion SPECT/CT imaging in the diagnostic strategy of pulmonary thromboembolism. Hell J Nucl Med 2020; 23 (03) 304-311
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Squizzato A, Luciani D, Rubboli A. et al. Differential diagnosis of pulmonary embolism in outpatients with non-specific cardiopulmonary symptoms. Intern Emerg Med 2013; 8 (08) 695-702 Erratum in: Intern Emerg Med. 2013 Dec;8(8):703. Gennaro, Leonardo Di [corrected to Di Gennaro, Leonardo]. PMID: 22094406
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Huisman MV, Klok FA. Diagnostic management of clinically suspected acute pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (Suppl 1): 312-317
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Palmowski K, Oltmanns U, Kreuter M, Mottaghy FM, Palmowski M, Behrendt FF. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: conventional ventilation/perfusion SPECT is superior to the combination of perfusion SPECT and nonenhanced CT. Respiration 2014; 88 (04) 291-297
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Suh M. In the COVID-19 era, is it ok to perform a perfusion-only SPECT/CT for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism?. Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2022; 56 (02) 67-70
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Das JP, Yeh R, Schöder H. Clinical utility of perfusion (Q)-single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT for diagnosing pulmonary embolus (PE) in COVID-19 patients with a moderate to high pre-test probability of PE. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48 (03) 794-799
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Furuya-Kanamori L, Meletis E, Xu C, Kostoulas P, Doi SA. Overconfident results with the bivariate random effects model for meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. J Evid Based Med 2022; 15 (01) 6-9
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Scherer RW, Saldanha IJ. How should systematic reviewers handle conference abstracts? A view from the trenches. Syst Rev 2019; 8 (01) 264
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar