ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2026
Perfusion-only Q-SPECT as a rule-out tool for CTEPH in resource-limited settings: a feasibility study on reducing unnecessary referrals to tertiary centers.
Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of perfusion-only Q-SPECT in suspected chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) and to assess its potential role in reducing unnecessary referrals in resource-limited settings.
methodsBetween January 2022 and February 2024, 42 patients with suspected CTEPH underwent perfusion-only Q-SPECT at a secondary care center. Patients were stratified into Group 1 (no defect) and Group 2 (defect present). Defect-positive cases were further assessed with computed tomography pulmonary angiography (CTPA) and multidisciplinary follow-up, whereas defect-negative cases were verified by structured clinical and imaging follow-up. Final diagnoses were established using a composite reference standard based on imaging, clinical assessment, and multidisciplinary evaluation. A validated single-patient preparation method for 99mTc-MAA was applied to enable daily imaging. Diagnostic performance was analyzed using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and overall accuracy.
resultsOf the 42 patients, 18 (43%) were male, with a median age of 56.5 years. Confirmed CTEPH was diagnosed in 7 patients (16.6%). Patients older than 50 years tended to have a higher prevalence of perfusion defects (61% vs. 32%), (χ², p = 0.059) and a positive correlation was found between age and defect count (rho = 0.315, p = 0.042). Twenty-two patients (52.4%) had normal Q-SPECT results (Group 1), yielding an NPV of 100%. Among defect-positive patients (Group 2), nine had ≥ 5 typical wedge-shaped defects, while atypical or non-segmental defects were classified as non-embolic in three patients. For the entire cohort, diagnostic performance was as follows: sensitivity 85%, specificity 77%, PPV 43%, NPV 96%, and overall accuracy 79%.
conclusionIn this single-center cohort, perfusion-only Q-SPECT was feasible as an initial imaging approach for suspected CTEPH at a secondary care level. Patients without perfusion defects did not demonstrate findings consistent with CTEPH during structured follow-up, allowing more than half of suspected cases to be managed locally. Defect-positive patients required further diagnostic verification with CTPA and, when indicated, invasive assessment. Overall, these findings support the feasibility of a pragmatic, stepwise diagnostic strategy incorporating perfusion-only Q-SPECT in resource-limited settings, pending confirmation in larger prospective studies.
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.