These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Quantification of myocardial perfusion reserve by CZT-SPECT: A head to head comparison with 82Rubidium PET imaging.
    Author: Acampa W, Zampella E, Assante R, Genova A, De Simini G, Mannarino T, D'Antonio A, Gaudieri V, Nappi C, Buongiorno P, Mainolfi CG, Petretta M, Cuocolo A.
    Journal: J Nucl Cardiol; 2021 Dec; 28(6):2827-2839. PubMed ID: 32383083.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: We measured myocardial blood flow (MBF) and perfusion reserve (MPR) by dynamic CZT-SPECT and 82Rb-PET in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD) and compared the accuracy of the two methods in predicting obstructive CAD. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with available coronary angiography data underwent 99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT and 82Rb-PET cardiac imaging. Stress and rest MBF and MPR were calculated by both methods and compared. Diagnostic accuracies of CZT-SPECT and PET were also assessed using a receiver-operator-characteristic curve. RESULTS: CZT-SPECT yielded similar baseline MBF, but higher hyperemic MBF and MPR values compared to PET. There was a modest correlation between the two methods for MPR (r = 0.56, P < .01). MPR by CZT-SPECT showed a good ability in identify a reduced MPR by PET, with an area under the curve of 0.85. A MPR cut-off of 2.5 was identified by CZT-SPECT for detection of abnormal MPR by PET, with a sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of 86%, 73% and 80%. The area under the curve for the identification of obstructive CAD by regional MPR were 0.83 for CZT-SPECT and 0.84 for PET (P = .90). At CZT-SPECT, a regional MPR of 2.1 provided the best trade-off between sensitivity and specificity for identifying obstructive CAD. Diagnostic accuracy of CZT-SPECT and PET using respective cut-off values was comparable (P = .62). CONCLUSION: Hyperemic MBF and MPR values obtained by CZT-SPECT are higher than those measured by 82Rb-PET imaging, with a moderate correlation between the two methods. CZT-SPECT shows good diagnostic accuracy for the identification of obstructive CAD. These findings may encourage the use of this new technique to a better risk stratification and patient management.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]