{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03268945022288262, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.74, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Suspected pulmonary embolism in patients with pulmonary fibrosis: Discordance between ventilation/perfusion SPECT and CT pulmonary angiography

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is a common differential diagnosis in patients with pulmonary fibrosis presenting with a clinical deterioration. Both ventilation/perfusion (V/Q)‐single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and computed tomographic pulmonary angiography (CTPA) are routinely used to detect PE. However, the value of V/Q‐SPECT and CTPA in this scenario has not been studied so far. We aimed to investigate the concordance of V/Q‐SPECT and CTPA in patients with pulmonary fibrosis and suspicion of pulmonary embolism.