ArticleBMJ open2024
Comparison of three diagnostic strategies for suspicion of pulmonary embolism: planar ventilation-perfusion scan (V/Q), CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and single photon emission CT ventilation-perfusion scan (SPECT V/Q): a protocol of a randomised controlled trial.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02983760 (Comparison of 3 Diagnostic Strategies of Pulmonary Embolism), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Comparison of 3 Diagnostic Strategies of Pulmonary Embolism : Planar Ventilation-perfusion Scintigraphy (Planar V/Q Scan), Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA), and V/Q Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT)
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative perfusion imaging from non-contrast micro-ct for pulmonary embolism evaluation in preclinical models.Physics in medicine and biology · 2026Article
- Comparison of pulmonary ventilation/perfusion tomography and conventional diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of pulmonary thromboembolism.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- Diagnoses of pulmonary embolism from non-contrast 4DCT using image processing-derived quantitative perfusion scores.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Article
- On the construction of a large-scale database of AI-assisted annotating lung ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy for pulmonary embolism (VQ4PEDB).Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPulmonary embolism (PE) is a challenge to diagnose and when missed, exposes patients to potentially fatal recurrent events. Beyond CT pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and planar ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scan, single photon emission CT (SPECT) V/Q emerged a new diagnostic modality of scintigraphic acquisition that has been reported to improve diagnostic performances. To date, no management outcome study or randomised trial evaluated an algorithm based on SPECT V/Q for PE diagnosis. We present the design of a randomised multicentre, international management study comparing SPECT V/Q with validated strategies. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe will include a total of 3672 patients with suspected PE requiring chest imaging, randomised into three different groups, each using a different diagnostic strategy based on SPECT V/Q, CTPA and planar V/Q scan. Randomisation will be unbalanced (2:1:1), with twice as many patients in SPECT V/Q arm (n=1836) as in CTPA and planar V/Q arms (n=918 in each). Our primary objective will be to determine whether a diagnostic strategy based on SPECT V/Q is non-inferior to previously validated strategies in terms of diagnostic exclusion safety as assessed by the 3-month risk of thromboembolism in patients with a negative diagnostic workup. Secondary outcomes will be the proportion of patients diagnosed with PE in each arm, patients requiring additional tests, the incidence of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding and the incidence and cause of death in each arm. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial is funded by a grant from Brest University Hospital and by INVENT. The study protocol was approved by Biomedical Research Ethics Committee. The investigator or delegate will obtain signed informed consent from all patients prior to inclusion in the trial. Our results will inform future clinical practice guidelines and solve the current discrepancy between nuclear medicine guidelines and clinical scientific society guidelines. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02983760.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.