BACKGROUND: The simultaneous assessment of perfusion and function with the use of technetium 99m sestamibi gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is helpful for the detection of myocardial viability, but its value in comparison with more established methods is not yet defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study compared low-dose dobutamine (LDD) nitrate-enhanced gated SPECT with LDD echocardiography for predicting recovery of regional ventricular function after revascularization in 25 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. In both studies, regional function (wall motion and thickening) at rest, during inotropic stimulation, and after revascularization was scored by a 4-point scale. In LDD echocardiography, the prediction of reversible dysfunction was based on the recognition of contractile reserve in asynergic (hypokinetic or a-dyskinetic) segments. In LDD gated sestamibi SPECT, reversible dysfunction was predicted on the basis of perfusion quantification (sestamibi uptake >or= 50%) in a-dyskinetic segments and on the basis of contractile reserve in hypokinetic segments. LDD echocardiography predicted reversible dysfunction with sensitivity, specificity, and global accuracy of 57%, 85%, and 75%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of LDD gated SPECT for identifying dysfunctional segments capable of functional recovery were 77% and 88%, respectively, with a diagnostic accuracy of 84% (P <.02 vs LDD echocardiography). CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of 2 different markers of viability, such as cellular integrity in a-dyskinetic segments and contractile reserve in hypokinetic segments, as permitted by LDD gated sestamibi SPECT, showed higher predictive accuracy for reversible dysfunction than the assessment of contractile reserve in all asynergic segments with LDD echocardiography.
BACKGROUND: The simultaneous assessment of perfusion and function with the use of technetium 99m sestamibi gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is helpful for the detection of myocardial viability, but its value in comparison with more established methods is not yet defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study compared low-dose dobutamine (LDD) nitrate-enhanced gated SPECT with LDD echocardiography for predicting recovery of regional ventricular function after revascularization in 25 patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. In both studies, regional function (wall motion and thickening) at rest, during inotropic stimulation, and after revascularization was scored by a 4-point scale. In LDD echocardiography, the prediction of reversible dysfunction was based on the recognition of contractile reserve in asynergic (hypokinetic or a-dyskinetic) segments. In LDD gated sestamibi SPECT, reversible dysfunction was predicted on the basis of perfusion quantification (sestamibi uptake >or= 50%) in a-dyskinetic segments and on the basis of contractile reserve in hypokinetic segments. LDD echocardiography predicted reversible dysfunction with sensitivity, specificity, and global accuracy of 57%, 85%, and 75%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of LDD gated SPECT for identifying dysfunctional segments capable of functional recovery were 77% and 88%, respectively, with a diagnostic accuracy of 84% (P <.02 vs LDD echocardiography). CONCLUSIONS: The combined use of 2 different markers of viability, such as cellular integrity in a-dyskinetic segments and contractile reserve in hypokinetic segments, as permitted by LDD gated sestamibi SPECT, showed higher predictive accuracy for reversible dysfunction than the assessment of contractile reserve in all asynergic segments with LDD echocardiography.
Authors: M Leoncini; G Marcucci; R Sciagrà; D Mondanelli; A M Traini; M Magni; F Frascarelli; A Mennuti; R P Dabizzi Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2000-07-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: L Pace; P Perrone-Filardi; P Mainenti; M Prastaro; P Vezzuto; A Varrone; T Crisci; A Cuocolo; S Dellegrottaglie; F Piscione; M Chiariello; M Salvatore Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Date: 1998-07
Authors: H Baumgartner; G Porenta; Y K Lau; M Wutte; U Klaar; M Mehrabi; R J Siegel; J Czernin; G Laufer; H Sochor; H Schelbert; M C Fishbein; G Maurer Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1998-11-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: S Kumita ; K Cho; H Nakajo; M Toba; T Kijima; S Mizumura; T Oshina; T Kumazaki; J Sano; K Sakurai; K Munakata Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2001 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: R Sciagrà; G Bisi; G M Santoro; F Zerauschek; S Sestini; P Pedenovi; R Pappagallo; P F Fazzini Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1997-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: M G Levine; C C McGill; A W Ahlberg; M P White; S Giri; B Shareef; D Waters; G V Heller Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1999-01-01 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: P Perrone-Filardi; L Pace; M Prastaro; F Squame; S Betocchi; A Soricelli; F Piscione; C Indolfi; T Crisci; M Salvatore; M Chiariello Journal: Circulation Date: 1996-12-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Sharmila Dorbala; Karthik Ananthasubramaniam; Ian S Armstrong; Panithaya Chareonthaitawee; E Gordon DePuey; Andrew J Einstein; Robert J Gropler; Thomas A Holly; John J Mahmarian; Mi-Ae Park; Donna M Polk; Raymond Russell; Piotr J Slomka; Randall C Thompson; R Glenn Wells Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 5.952