Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Krumholz, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by DeLong, J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Krumholz, R. A.
Right arrow Articles by DeLong, J. F.
(Chest. 1972;62:4-8.)
© 1972 American College of Chest Physicians

Lung Scan Utilization in the Diagnosis of Pulmonary Disease

Richard A. Krumholz M.D., F.C.C.P.1; Gilbert M. Burnham M.D.1; and James F. DeLong 1

1 C. F. Kettering Memorial Hospital, Kettering, Ohio

Radioisotope131 I scanning of the lungs has been used primarily as a diagnostic tool in suspected pulmonary embolism. The present study has analyzed 71 consecutive scans in relation to independent observer grading, interpretation of the scan versus the posterior-anterior chest film and lung scan grade versus multiple pulmonary function parameters. The scans were done in patients with obstructive pulmonary disease (emphysema, bronchitis, asthma, and bronchiectasis) none of whom had overt or suspected pulmonary embolism. Two independent observers graded the scans on a 1 to 6 unit scale. There was agreement within one unit in 73 percent of the scans. There was matching of interpretation (normal versus abnormal) between the posterior-anterior chest x-ray film (interpreted by radiologist) and the scan (interpreted by the two observers) in 76 percent of the cases. There was significant correlation between lung scan grade and FEV0.5, FEV1.0, FEV2.0, FEV3.0, FEV25.75, FEV200-1200, and DLco/TLC ratio. The highest correlation (0.643) was between the lung scan abnormality and FEV1.0. This study demonstrates direct relationships between abnormal pulmonary function and abnormal lung scanning in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and infers a negation of the effectiveness of lung scans in diagnosing pulmonary embolism in the face of underlying pulmonary disease which is so prevalent today.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1972 by the American College of Chest Physicians.