Алгоритм диагностики тромбоэмболии легочной артерии у беременных: клинические рекомендации Американского торакального общества / Общества торакальной радиологии

Полный текст:


По материалам: Leung A.N., Bull T.M., Jaeschke R. et al. An Official American Thoracic Society / Society of Thoracic Radiology Clinical Practice Guideline: Evaluation of suspected pulmonary embolism in pregnancy. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2011; 184: 1200–1208.

Об авторе

статья Редакционная


Список литературы

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Pregnancyrelated mortality surveillance–United States, 1991–1999. Morbid. Mortal. Wkly Rep. 2003; 52: 1–8.

2. Marik P.E., Plante L.A. Venous thromboembolic disease and pregnancy. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008; 359: 2025–2033.

3. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Greentop Guideline № 28: Thromboembolic disease in pregnancy and the puerperium: Acute management. 2007 [accessed Oct. 4, 2011]. Available from: www.rcog.org.uk / guidelines

4. Stein P.D., Woodard P.K., Weg J.G. et al. Diagnostic pathways in acute pulmonary embolism: recommendations of the PIOPED II Investigators. Radiology 2007; 242: 15–21.

5. Schuster M.E., Fishman J.E., Copeland J.F. et al. Pulmonary embolism in pregnant patients: a survey of practices and policies for CT pulmonary angiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2003; 181: 1495–1498.

6. Bourjeily G., Paidas M., Khalil H. et al. Pulmonary embolism in pregnancy. Lancet 2010; 375: 500–512.

7. Schunemann H.J., Jaeschke R., Cook D.J. et al. An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2006; 174: 605–614.

8. Chan W.S., Ray J.G., Murray S. et al. Suspected pulmonary embolism in pregnancy: clinical presentation, results of lung scanning, and subsequent maternal and pediatric outcomes. Arch. Intern. Med. 2002; 162: 1170–1175.

9. Cahill A.G., Stout M.J., Macones G.A., Bhalla S. Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in pregnancy using computed-tomographic angiography or ventilation-perfusion. Obstetr. And Gynecol. 2009; 114: 124–129.

10. Gherman R.B., Goodwin T.M., Leung B. et al. Incidence, clinical characteristics, and timing of objectively diagnosed venous thromboembolism during pregnancy. Obstetr. And Gynecol. 1999; 94: 730–734.

11. Powrie R.O., Larson L., Rosene*Montella K. et al. Alveolararterial oxygen gradient in acute pulmonary embolism in pregnancy. Am. J. Obstetr. Gynecol. 1998; 178: 394–396.

12. Heit J.A., Kobbervig C.E., James A.H. et al. Trends in the incidence of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy or postpartum: a 30-year population-based study. Ann. Intern. Med. 2005; 143: 697–706.

13. Damodaram M., Kaladindi M., Luckit J., Yoong W. D-dimers as a screening test for venous thromboembolism in pregnancy: is it of any use? J. Obstetr. Gynaecol.2009; 29: 101–103.

14. Levy M.S., Spencer F., Ginsberg J.S., Anderson J.A. Reading between the (Guidelines). Management of submassive pulmonary embolism in the first trimester of pregnancy. Thromb. Res. 2008; 121: 705–707.

15. To M.S., Hunt B.J., Nelson*Piercy C. A negative D-dimer does not exclude venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy. J. Obstetr. Gynaecol. 2008; 28: 222–223.

16. Chan W.S., Lee A., Spencer F.A. et al. D-dimer testing in pregnant patients: towards determining the next ’level’ in the diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2010; 8: 1004–1011.

17. Kovac M., Mikovic Z., Rakicevic L. et al. The use of D-dimer with new cutoff can be useful in diagnosis of venous thromboembolism in pregnancy. Eur. J. Obstetr. Gynecol. Reprod. Biol. 2010; 148: 27–30.

18. Chan W.S., Chunilal S., Lee A. et al. A red blood cell agglutination D-dimer test to exclude deep venous thrombosis in pregnancy. Ann. Intern. Med. 2007; 147: 165–170.

19. Ahmad A., Jamjute P., Ghosh T., Klazinga D. D-dimer negative deep vein thrombosis in puerperium. Eur. Clin. Obstetr. Gynaecol. 2008; 3: 131–134.

20. International Commission of Radiological Protection. Pregnancy and medical radiation: Publication 84. Ann. ICRP 2000; 30: 1–44.

21. McCollough C.H., Schueler B.A., Atwell T.D. et al. Radiation exposure and pregnancy: when should we be concerned? Radiographics 2007; 27: 909–917; discuss. 917–908.

22. Linet M.S., Kim K.P., Rajaraman P. Children’s exposure to diagnostic Medical radiation and cancer risk: epidemiologic and dosimetric considerations. Pediatr. Radiol. 2009; 39: S4–S26.

23. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation NRC. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2. Washington: National Academy Press; 2006.

24. Bourjeily G., Chalhoub M., Phornphutkul C. et al. Neonatal thyroid function: effect of a single exposure to iodinated contrast medium in utero. Radiology 2010; 256: 744–750.

25. Food and Drug Administration. Content and format of labeling for human prescription drug and biological products; requirements for pregnancy and lactation labeling. Fed. Registr. 2008; 29: 30831–30868.

26. Lin S.P., Brown J.J. MR contrast agents: physical and pharmacologic basics. J. Magn. Reson. Imag. 2007; 25: 884–899.

27. Webb J.A., Thomsen H.S., Morcos S.K. The use of iodinated and gadolinium contrast Med.ia during pregnancy and lactation. Eur. Radiol. 2005; 15: 1234–1240.

28. Worsley D.F., Alavi A., Aronchick J.M. et al. Chest radiographic findings in patients with acute pulmonary embolism: observations from the PIOPED Study. Radiology 1993; 189: 133–136.

29. Greenspan R.H., Ravin C.E., Polansky S.M., McLoud T.C. Accuracy of the chest radiograph in diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Invest. Radiol. 1982; 17: 539–543.

30. Gottschalk A., Stein P.D., Goodman L.R., Sostman H.D. Overview of prospective investigation of pulmonary embolism diagnosis II. Semin. Nucl. Med. 2002; 32: 173–182.

31. Daftary A., Gregory M., Seibyl J.P., Saluja S. Chest radiograph as a triage tool in the imaging-based diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005; 185: 132–134.

32. Forbes K.P., Reid J.H., Murchison J.T. Do preliminary chest X-ray findings define the optimum role of pulmonary scintigraphy in suspected pulmonary embolism? Clin. Radiol. 2001; 56: 397–400.

33. Scarsbrook A.F., Bradley K.M., Gleeson F.V. Perfusion scintigraphy: diagnostic utility in pregnant women with suspected pulmonary embolic disease. Eur. Radiol. 2007; 17: 2554–2560.

34. Ridge C.A., McDermott S., Freyne B.J. et al. Pulmonary embolism in pregnancy: comparison of pulmonary CT angiography and lung scintigraphy. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2009; 193: 1223–1227.

35. Righini M., Le Gal G., Aujesky D. et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism by multidetector CT alone or combined with venous ultrasonography of the leg: a randomised noninferiority trial. Lancet 2008; 371: 1343–1352.

36. van Rossum A.B., van Houwelingen H.C., Kieft G.J., Patty* nama P.M. Prevalence of deep vein thrombosis in suspected and proven pulmonary embolism: a meta-analysis. Br. J. Radiol. 1998; 71: 1260–1265.

37. Chan W.S., Lee A., Spencer F.A. et al. Predicting deep venous thrombosis in pregnancy: out in “LEFt” field? Ann. Intern. Med. 2009; 151: 85–92.

38. Parker J.A., Coleman R.E., Siegel B.A. et al. Procedure guideline for lung scintigraphy: 1.0. Society of Nuclear Medicine. J. Nucl. Med. 1996; 37: 1906–1910.

39. Shahir K., Goodman L.R., Tali A. et al. Pulmonary embolism in pregnancy: CT pulmonary angiography versus perfusion scanning. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2010; 195: W214– W220.

40. Revel M.P., Cohen S., Sanchez O. et al. Pulmonary embolism during pregnancy: diagnosis with lung scintigraphy or CT angiography? Radiology 2011; 258: 590–598.

41. King U., Im J.M., Freeman S.J. et al. Quality of CT pulmonary angiography for suspected pulmonary embolus in pregnancy. Eur. Radiol. 2008; 18: 2709–2715.

42. Litmanovich D., Boiselle P.M., Bankier A.A. et al. Dose reduction in computed tomographic angiography of pregnant patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 2009; 33: 961–966.

43. Kluge A., Luboldt W., Bachmann G. Acute pulmonary embolism to the subsegmental level: diagnostic accuracy of three MRI techniques compared with 16-MDCT. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006; 187: W7–14.

44. Chen M.M., Coakley F.V., Kaimal A., Laros R.K.Jr. Guidelines for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging use during pregnancy and lactation. Obstetr. and Gynecol. 2008; 112: 333–340.

45. Meaney J.F., Weg J.G., Chenevert T.L. et al. Diagnosis of pulmonary embolism with magnetic resonance angiography. N. Engl. J. Med. 1997; 336: 1422–1427.

46. Gupta A., Frazer C.K., Ferguson J.M. et al. Acute pulmonary embolism: diagnosis with MR angiography. Radiology 1999; 210: 353–359.

47. Oudkerk M., van Beek E.J., Wielopolski P. et al. Comparison of contrastenhanced magnetic resonance angiography and conventional pulmonary angiography for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism: a prospective study. Lancet 2002; 359: 1643–1647.

48. Ohno Y., Higashino T., Takenaka D. et al. MR angiography with sensitivity encoding (SENSE) for suspected pulmonary embolism: comparison with MDCT and ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 91–98.

49. Pleszewski B., Chartrand*Lefebvre C., Qanadli S.D. et al. Gadolinium-enhanced pulmonary magnetic resonance angiography in the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism: a prospective study on 48 patients. Clin. Imag. 2006; 30: 166–172.

50. Stein P.D., Chenevert T.L., Fowler S.E. et al. Gadoliniumenhanced magnetic resonance angiography for pulmonary embolism: a multicenter prospective study (PIOPED III). Ann. Intern. Med. 2010; 152: 434–443.

51. van Rooij W.J., den Heeten G.J., Sluzewski M. Pulmonary embolism: diagnosis in 211 patients with use of selective pulmonary digital subtraction angiography with a flowdirected catheter. Radiology 1995; 195: 793–797.

52. Forauer A.R., McLean G.K., Wallace L.P. Clinical follow-up of patients after a negative digital subtraction pulmonary arteriogram in the evaluation of pulmonary embolism. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 1998; 9: 903–908.

53. Henry J.W., Relyea B., Stein P.D. Continuing risk of thromboemboli among patients with normal pulmonary angiograms. Chest 1995; 107: 1375–1378.

54. Wittram C., Waltman A.C., Shepard J.A. et al. Discordance between CT and angiography in the PIOPED II study. Radiology 2007; 244: 883–889.

55. Hurwitz L.M., Yoshizumi T., Reiman R.E. et al. Radiation dose to the fetus from body MDCT during early gestation. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006; 186: 871–876.

56. Winer*Muram H.T., Boone J.M., Brown H.L. et al. Pulmonary embolism in pregnant patients: fetal radiation dose with helical CT. Radiology 2002; 224: 487–492.

57. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation NRC. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2. National Academy of Sciences; 2006.

58. Parker M.S., Hui F.K., Camacho M.A. et al. Female breast radiation exposure during CT pulmonary angiography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2005; 185: 1228–1233.

59. Cook J.V., Kyriou J. Radiation from CT and perfusion scanning in pregnancy. Br. Med. J. 2005; 331: 350.

60. Hurwitz L.M., Yoshizumi T.T., Reiman R.E. et al. Radiation dose to the female breast from 16-MDCT body protocols. Am. J. Roentgenol. 2006; 186: 1718–1722.

61. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: Publication 53. Ann. ICRP 1987; 18: 1–377.

62. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: Publication 80 (addendum 2 to ICRP publication 53). Ann. ICRP 1998; 28: 1–126.

63. Hurwitz L.M., Reiman R.E., Yoshizumi T.T. et al. Radiation dose from contemporary cardiothoracic multidetector CT protocols with an anthropomorphic female phantom: implications for cancer induction. Radiology 2007; 245: 742–750.

64. Brenner D.J., Doll R., Goodhead D.T. et al. Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2003; 100: 13761–13766.

65. McCullough L.B., Chervenak F.A. Ethics in obstetrics and gynecology. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994.

66. Schaefer*Prokop C., Prokop M. CTPA for the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism during pregnancy. Eur. Radiol. 2008; 18: 2705–2708.

67. Kearon C., Kahn S.R., Agnelli G. et al. Antithrombotic therapy for venous thromboembolic disease: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines (8th Edition). Chest 2008; 133: 454S–545S.

68. Kline J.A., Hernandez*Nino J., Jones A.E. et al. Prospective study of the clinical features and outcomes of emergency department patients with delayed diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Acad. Emerg. Med. 2007; 14: 592–598.

69. Smith S.B., Geske J.B., Maguire J.M. et al. Early anticoagulation is associated with reduced mortality for acute pulmonary embolism. Chest 2010; 137: 1382–1390.

70. Sostman H.D., Coleman R.E., DeLong D.M. et al. Evaluation of revised criteria for ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy in patients with suspected pulmonary embolism. Radiology 1994; 193: 103–107.

71. Sostman H.D., Miniati M., Gottschalk A. et al. Sensitivity and specificity of perfusion scintigraphy combined with chest radiography for acute pulmonary embolism in PIOPED II. J. Nucl. Med. 2008; 49: 1741–1748.

Дополнительные файлы

Для цитирования: Редакционная с. Алгоритм диагностики тромбоэмболии легочной артерии у беременных: клинические рекомендации Американского торакального общества / Общества торакальной радиологии.  Пульмонология. 2012;(2):13-24.

For citation: . Diagnostic algorithm for pulmonary embolism in pregnant women (based on practice guidelines of the American Thoracic Society and the Society of Thoracic Radiology). Russian Pulmonology. 2012;(2):13-24. (In Russ.)

Просмотров: 439

Обратные ссылки

  • Обратные ссылки не определены.

ISSN 0869-0189 (Print)
ISSN 2541-9617 (Online)