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: Is the addition of ECG gating to technetium-99m sestamibi SPET of value in the assessment of myocardial viability? An evaluation based on two-dimensional echocardiography following revascularization.
    Author: González P, Massardo T, Muñoz A, Jofré J, Rivera A, Yovanovich J, Maiers E, Ayala F, Humeres P, Ramírez A, Arriagada M, Zavala A.
    Journal: Eur J Nucl Med; 1996 Oct; 23(10):1315-22. PubMed ID: 8781135.
    Abstract:
    The main goal of this study was to evaluate whether the addition of ECG gating to technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission tomographic (SPET) perfusion imaging assists the prediction of recovery of regional wall motion abnormalities after revascularization. Thirty-six patients with coronary artery disease were included in the study. All had wall motion abnormalities, and 31 (86%) had a clinical history of myocardial infarction. Coronary artery bypass surgery was performed in 18 patients and angioplasty in the remainder. All underwent ECG-gated and non-gated SPET at rest and after intravenous dipyridamole. Two-dimensional echocardiography was performed at a mean of 27 days before revascularization and at a mean of 69 days following revascularization to assess segmental wall motion changes. Perfusion prior to revascularization was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively on gated and non-gated SPET, and the results compared with those of echocardiography. Bullseye parameters were obtained from a normal database, generated from data in 40 normal volunteers, using dipyridamole ECG-gated and non-gated sestamibi SPET. There was good concordance between gated and non-gated qualitative analysis (79% with kappa=0.65) for normal, viable or necrotic segments. Gated SPET predicted functional recovery in 27 of 35 (77%) segments showing echocardiographic improvement while non-gated SPET did so in 30 of 39 (77%) such segments. Gated SPET predicted no functional recovery in 20 of 45 (44%) segments that did not show improved wall motion after revascularization, while with non-gated SPET the figure was 18 of 51 (35%). The positive predictive values of gated and non-gated SPET with regard to the recovery of wall motion following revascularization were 52% and 48%, while the negative predictive values were 71% and 67%, respectively. 99mTc-sestamibi had a low predictive value for recovery of function if visual assessment was used in the analysis of SPET data. Quantitative bullseye sestamibi parameters (defect extension and severity, reversibility and percentage change in extension), from gated or non-gated studies, appear best to distinguish which segments will display improved motility on the echocardiogram after revascularization. The addition of ECG gating does not significantly increase the predictive value of SPET imaging with regard to recovery of function.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]