Letters to the Editor
Are We Overtreating Incidental Pulmonary Embolism? ― Reply ―
2021 年 85 巻 9 号 p. 1691-
詳細
2021 年 85 巻 9 号 p. 1691-
We thank Sueta et al1 for their letter. They have already reported precise perfusion CT of pulmonary embolism (PE) by dual-energy CT (DECT) without additional radiation risk.2 We agreed with their opinion that functional evaluation by perfusion data is important, not only for subsegmental PE but also more proximal PE. A modified Miller Score has been used to evaluate the amount of thrombus on CT, but it is not widely used because it is complicated and does not necessarily correlate with clinical findings.3
DECT can evaluate the severity of the acute phase from an imaging point of view.4 In addition, DECT may be able to assess the risk of further growth of minor thrombi and the risk of recurrence, providing a more accurate understanding of the natural history of PE. These natural histories are also important information for the continuation of anticoagulant therapy. We hope that research on functional information of PE and the prognosis of PE will progress with the spread of DECT.
M.M. has received lecture fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Bayer Healthcare. Y.Y. has received lecture fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, and Bayer Healthcare.
