NCT Number: NCT00000566
Prospective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis (PIOPED)
To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of two major, widely used technologies, radionuclear imaging (ventilation-perfusion scanning) and pulmonary angiography, for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism.
Looking for future studies?
Notify MeKey information
Conditions
Age range
18 year–75 year
Sex eligibility
All sexes
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 3
About this study
BACKGROUND:
In 1983, reliable data on the incidence of pulmonary embolism in the adult population and in groups identified at risk were not available because the sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic procedures had not been determined. Estimates suggested there were about half a million episodes of pulmonary embolism in hospitalized patients each year in the United States. Deaths attributable to pulmonary embolism would be expected in about one third of these patients if left untreated.
The clinical diagnosis of pulmonary embolism was subject to a high frequency of false positives and false negatives. The most definitive diagnostic procedure was pulmonary angiography, an invasive, expensive procedure which was not without risk. It required specialized equipment and highly trained personnel both for performance and for interpretation. Therefore, it was used to diagnose pulmonary embolism only in the major medical centers. Another technique utilized as a method to diagnose pulmonary embolism involved a combination of perfusion and ventilation scanning; this method was only minimally invasive. A normal perfusion scan was thought to be of considerable value because it essentially excluded the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. In selected patient populations, abnormal perfusion scans combined with normal ventilation scans were of substantial help in diagnosis.
Although there had been no acceptable validation of the use of perfusion scans in the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism, thousands of patients had been evaluated for pulmonary embolism based on perfusion scanning often using methods of imaging now considered to be inadequate. In the early 1980s, clinical practice interpreted a negative perfusion scan as overwhelming evidence against the presence of pulmonary emboli. This interpretation had not been adequately tested either in a prospective study or by long-term follow-up of patients to determine clinical outcome. With regards to positive perfusion scans, there were data to suggest that as many as two-thirds of positive perfusion scans could not subsequently be confirmed by pulmonary angiography. Prospective studies in which timely angiograms using selective injections and improved imaging techniques were needed to evaluate the usefulness of positive perfusion scans.
Phase I was initiated in September 1983. Protocols developed during Phase I underwent independent assessment review in April 1984 and were reviewed and approved by the May 1984 National Heart, Lung, and Blood Advisory Council. Recruitment and intervention started in January 1985 and ended in September 1986. Follow-up was completed on September 30, 1987.
DESIGN NARRATIVE:
Patients suspected of pulmonary embolism underwent a ventilation-perfusion scan. Patients with an abnormal perfusion scan underwent angiography. All patients were followed for one year.
Who can participate
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Men and women suspected of having a pulmonary embolism and who met the criteria to undergo angiography.
Treatment and study plan
angiography
ProcedureSponsors and collaborators
Lead sponsor
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI)
Nih
Registry information
Important dates
- Study start
- 1983
- Study completion
- 1989
- First posted
- Oct 28, 1999
- Registry last updated
- Apr 15, 2016
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Related clinical trials
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
Safety and Efficiency of the YEARS Algorithm Versus Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography Alone for Suspected Pulmonary Embolism in Patients With Malignancy
NCT04657120
Cancer, Cardiovascular Diseases
Antwerp, Belgium
View Trial DetailsProspective Investigation of Pulmonary Embolism Diagnosis (PIOPED II)
NCT00007085
Cardiovascular Diseases, Embolism
View Trial DetailsIdentifying Low-Risk Patients With Pulmonary Embolism
NCT00086151
Cardiovascular Diseases, Embolism
View Trial DetailsIncidence and Outcomes of Venous Thromboembolism
NCT00005351
Cardiovascular Diseases, Embolism
View Trial Details