Abstract
Pulmonary angiography and contrast venography are nearly 100 percent sensitive and specific in making the diagnoses of pulmonary embolism and deep-vein thrombosis. Nevertheless, these conditions frequently go undetected, often with serious consequences. The standard approach to the diagnosis of acute pulmonary embolism involves the recognition of risk factors for the disorder and the presence of suggestive, albeit nonspecific, clinical findings, followed by ventilation–perfusion scanning. If the scan is normal, pulmonary embolism is ruled out. If, on the basis of the scan, the probability of pulmonary embolism is deemed to be high, treatment is indicated, except in unusual circumstances. Unfortunately, the . . .