We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of coronary flow reserve estimated by dynamic radionuclide SPECT and multi-detector x-ray CT.
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2017 October
BACKGROUND: Recent technical advances in multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) allow for assessment of coronary flow reserve (CFR). We compared regional CFR by dynamic SPECT and by dynamic MDCT in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS: Thirty-five patients, (29 males, mean age 69 years) with greater than average Framingham risk of CAD, underwent dipyridamole vasodilator stress imaging. CFR was estimated using dynamic SPECT and dynamic MDCT imaging in the same patients. Myocardial perfusion findings were correlated with obstructive CAD (≥50% luminal narrowing) on CT coronary angiography (CA).
RESULTS: Mean CFR estimated by SPECT and MDCT in 595 myocardial segments was not different (1.51 ± 0.46 vs. 1.50 ± 0.37, p = NS). Correlation of segmental CFR by SPECT and MDCT was fair (r 2 = 0.39, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that MDCT in comparison to SPECT systematically underestimated CFR in higher CFR ranges. By CTCA, 12 patients had normal CA, 11 had non-obstructive, and 12 had obstructive CAD. CFR by both techniques was significantly higher in territories of normal CA than in territories subtended by non-obstructive or obstructive CAD. SPECT CFR was also significantly different in territories subtended by non-obstructive and obstructive CAD, whereas MDCT CFR was not.
CONCLUSION: Despite relative underestimation of high CFR values, MDCT CFR shows promise for assessing the pathophysiological significance of anatomic CAD.
METHODS: Thirty-five patients, (29 males, mean age 69 years) with greater than average Framingham risk of CAD, underwent dipyridamole vasodilator stress imaging. CFR was estimated using dynamic SPECT and dynamic MDCT imaging in the same patients. Myocardial perfusion findings were correlated with obstructive CAD (≥50% luminal narrowing) on CT coronary angiography (CA).
RESULTS: Mean CFR estimated by SPECT and MDCT in 595 myocardial segments was not different (1.51 ± 0.46 vs. 1.50 ± 0.37, p = NS). Correlation of segmental CFR by SPECT and MDCT was fair (r 2 = 0.39, p < 0.001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed that MDCT in comparison to SPECT systematically underestimated CFR in higher CFR ranges. By CTCA, 12 patients had normal CA, 11 had non-obstructive, and 12 had obstructive CAD. CFR by both techniques was significantly higher in territories of normal CA than in territories subtended by non-obstructive or obstructive CAD. SPECT CFR was also significantly different in territories subtended by non-obstructive and obstructive CAD, whereas MDCT CFR was not.
CONCLUSION: Despite relative underestimation of high CFR values, MDCT CFR shows promise for assessing the pathophysiological significance of anatomic CAD.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app