4.2 Article

The role of computed tomography in the diagnosis of acute and chronic pulmonary embolism

期刊

DIAGNOSTIC AND INTERVENTIONAL RADIOLOGY
卷 21, 期 4, 页码 307-316

出版社

AVES
DOI: 10.5152/dir.2015.14403

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a potentially life threatening condition requiring adequate diagnosis and treatment. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) is excellent for including and excluding PE, therefore CT is the first-choice diagnostic imaging technique in patients suspected of having acute PE. Due to its wide availability and low invasiveness, CTPA tends to be overused. Correct implementation of clinical decision rules in diagnostic workup for PE improves adequate use of CT. Also, CT adds prognostic value by evaluating right ventricular (RV) function. CT-assessed RV dysfunction and to lesser extent central emboli location predicts PE-related mortality in normotensive and hypotensive patients, while PE embolic obstruction index has limited prognostic value. Simple RV/left ventricular (LV) diameter ratio measures > 1.0 already predict risk for adverse outcome, whereas ratios < 1.0 can safely exclude adverse outcome. Consequently, assessing the RV/LV diameter ratio may help identify patients who are potential candidates for treatment at home instead of treatment in the hospital. A minority of patients develop chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) following acute PE, which is a life-threatening condition that can be diagnosed by CT. In proximal CTEPH, involving the more central pulmonary arteries, thrombectomy usually results in good outcome in terms of both functional status and long-term survival rate. CT is becoming the imaging method of choice for diagnosing CTEPH as it can identify patients who may benefit from thrombectomy. New CT developments such as distensibility measurements and dual-energy or subtraction techniques may further refine diagnosis and prognosis for improved patient care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据