Impact of imaging protocol on left ventricular ejection fraction using gated-SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging

10noopenopenMarcassa, C; Giubbini, R.; Acampa, W.; Cittanti, C.; Djepaxhija, O.; Gimelli, A.; Kokomani, A.; Medolago, G.; Milan, E.; Sciagrà, R.Marcassa, C; Giubbini, Raffaele; Acampa, W.; Cittanti, C.; Djepaxhija, O.; Gimelli, A.; Kokomani, A.; Medolago, Giuseppe; Milan, E.; Sciagrà, R

Quantification of Myocardial Blood Flow in Absolute Terms Using (82)Rb PET Imaging: The RUBY-10 Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) estimates from rubidium-82 positron emission tomography ((82)Rb PET) data using 10 software packages (SPs) based on 8 tracer kinetic models. BACKGROUND: It is unknown how MBF and MFR values from existing SPs agree for (82)Rb PET. METHODS: Rest and stress (82)Rb PET scans of 48 patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease were analyzed in 10 centers. Each center used 1 of 10 SPs to analyze global and regional MBF using the different kinetic models implemented. Values were considered to agree if they simultaneously had an intraclass correlation coefficient >0.75 and a difference <20% of the median across all programs. RESULTS: The most common model evaluated was the Ottawa Heart Institute 1-tissue compartment model (OHI-1-TCM). MBF values from 7 of 8 SPs implementing this model agreed best. Values from 2 other models (alternative 1-TCM and Axially distributed) also agreed well, with occasional differences. The MBF results from other models (e.g., 2-TCM and retention) were less in agreement with values from OHI-1-TCM. CONCLUSIONS: SPs using the most common kinetic model-OHI-1-TCM-provided consistent results in measuring global and regional MBF values, suggesting that they may be used interchangeably to process data acquired with a common imaging protocol

Comparison of contrast enhanced three dimensional echocardiography with MIBI gated SPECT for the evaluation of left ventricular function

Background. In clinical practice and in clinical trials, echocardiography and scintigraphy are used the most for the evaluation of global left ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular (LV) volumes. Actually, poor quality imaging and geometrical assumptions are the main limitations of LVEF measured by echocardiography. Contrast agents and 3D echocardiography are new methods that may alleviate these potential limitations. Methods. Therefore we sought to examine the accuracy of contrast 3D echocardiography for the evaluation of LV volumes and LVEF relative to MIBI gated SPECT as an independent reference. In 43 patients addressed for chest pain, contrast 3D echocardiography (RT3DE) and MIBI gated SPECT were prospectively performed on the same day. The accuracy and the variability of LV volumes and LVEF measurements were evaluated. Results. Due to good endocardial delineation, LV volumes and LVEF measurements by contrast RT3DE were feasible in 99% of the patients. The mean LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) of the group by scintigraphy was 143 65 mL and was underestimated by triplane contrast RT3DE (128 60 mL; p < 0.001) and less by full-volume contrast RT3DE (132 62 mL; p < 0.001). Limits of agreement with scintigraphy were similar for triplane andfull-volume, modalities with the best results for full-volume. Results were similar for calculation of LV end-systolic volume (LVESV). The mean LVEF was 44 16% with scintigraphy and was not significantly different with both triplane contrast RT3DE (45 15%) and full-volume contrast RT3DE (45 15%). There was an excellent correlation between two different observers for LVEDV, LVESV and LVEF measurements and inter observer agreement was also good for both contrast RT3DE techniques. Conclusion. Contrast RT3DE allows an accurate assessment of LVEF compared to the LVEF measured by SPECT, and shows low variability between observers. Although RT3DE triplane provides accurate evaluation of left ventricular function, RT3DE full-volume is superior to triplane modality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. © 2009 Cosyns et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Positron emission tomography; viable tool in patients pre-CABG?

Vascular Biology and Interventio

Assessment of left ventricular volumes; reliable by gated SPECT?

Ventricular Dysfunction & Heart Failur

Assessment of left ventricular function: visual or quantitative?

Cardiovascular Aspects of Radiolog

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection