BACKGROUND: The incremental prognostic value of rest-redistribution (201)Tl compared with stress and rest perfusion abnormalities has not been defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified 458 patients who underwent rest (201)Tl /stress (exercise or adenosine) (99m)Tc sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and had late (18 to 24 hours) (201)Tl imaging, were not revascularized within 60 days of SPECT, and were followed up at >1 year. SPECT images were visually analyzed with the use of a 20-segment model on a scale of 0 to 4. Thirty-seven cardiac deaths (CDs) and 17 nonfatal myocardial infarctions occurred. Univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that the presence of a large amount of rest (201)Tl reversibility (rest-late summed difference score [SDS] of >8) was a significant predictor of CD (chi(2) = 5.77, P = 0.02) and CD or myocardial infarction (chi(2) = 5.3, P = 0.02). The CD rate was 9.3% y(-1) in patients with rest-late SDS of >8 compared with 3.6% y(-1) in patients with a mild/moderate amount of rest reversibility (rest-late SDS 3 to 8) and 3.4% y(-1) in patients with no rest reversibility (rest-late SDS <3) (P = 0.029). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated significantly lower cumulative survival rates in patients with rest-late SDS of >8 (P = 0.01). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated that the presence of a large amount of resting reversibility was an independent and incremental predictor of CD after adjustment for stress and rest perfusion information. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that resting reversibility was not an independent predictor of referral to coronary angiography and revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of a large amount of resting (201)Tl reversibility is an independent predictor of CD over stress and rest perfusion abnormalities.
BACKGROUND: The incremental prognostic value of rest-redistribution (201)Tl compared with stress and rest perfusion abnormalities has not been defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified 458 patients who underwent rest (201)Tl /stress (exercise or adenosine) (99m)Tc sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and had late (18 to 24 hours) (201)Tl imaging, were not revascularized within 60 days of SPECT, and were followed up at >1 year. SPECT images were visually analyzed with the use of a 20-segment model on a scale of 0 to 4. Thirty-seven cardiac deaths (CDs) and 17 nonfatal myocardial infarctions occurred. Univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that the presence of a large amount of rest (201)Tl reversibility (rest-late summed difference score [SDS] of >8) was a significant predictor of CD (chi(2) = 5.77, P = 0.02) and CD or myocardial infarction (chi(2) = 5.3, P = 0.02). The CD rate was 9.3% y(-1) in patients with rest-late SDS of >8 compared with 3.6% y(-1) in patients with a mild/moderate amount of rest reversibility (rest-late SDS 3 to 8) and 3.4% y(-1) in patients with no rest reversibility (rest-late SDS <3) (P = 0.029). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated significantly lower cumulative survival rates in patients with rest-late SDS of >8 (P = 0.01). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated that the presence of a large amount of resting reversibility was an independent and incremental predictor of CD after adjustment for stress and rest perfusion information. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that resting reversibility was not an independent predictor of referral to coronary angiography and revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of a large amount of resting (201)Tl reversibility is an independent predictor of CD over stress and rest perfusion abnormalities.
Authors: David S Fieno; Louise E J Thomson; Piotr Slomka; Aiden Abidov; John D Friedman; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Allen E Atchley; Ami E Iskandrian; Dan Bensimhon; Stephen J Ellis; Dalane W Kitzman; Linda K Shaw; Robert A Pagnanelli; David J Whellan; Julius M Gardin; Andrew Kao; Khaled Abdul-Nour; Greg Ewald; Mary Norine Walsh; William E Kraus; Christopher M O'Connor; Salvador Borges-Neto Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2011-04-06 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: D S Berman; X Kang; E F Schisterman; J Gerlach; P B Kavanagh; J S Areeda; T Sharir; S W Hayes; L J Shaw; H C Lewin; J D Friedman; R Miranda; G Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2001 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Fatma A Aboul-Enein; Sean W Hayes; Naoya Matsumoto; John D Friedman; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2003 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Nitesh Sood; Firas Al Badarin; Matthew Parker; Raja Pullatt; Arnold F Jacobson; Timothy M Bateman; Gary V Heller Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-07-18 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Rene Nkoulou; Mathias Wolfrum; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Michael Fiechter; Ronny R Buechel; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2018-01-16 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jacobijne J Wiersma; Hein J Verberne; Wik L ten Holt; Ineke M Radder; Lea M Dijksman; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit; Mieke D Trip; Jan G P Tijssen; Jan J Piek Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2009-06-18 Impact factor: 5.952