BACKGROUND: Despite growing recognition of attenuation correction (AC) utilizing an external radiation source, prognostic studies using AC are lacking. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 419) who underwent stress Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging with AC but without ECG-gating, due to arrhythmia, were followed for cardiac death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI). A 17-segment model and the summed stress score (SSS) were used to classify both the non-AC and AC images. RESULTS: The 419 patients had a mean age of 71.5 +/- 11.7 years and most (70.6%) underwent pharmacologic stress. In follow-up, 35 (8.4%) patients suffered an adverse cardiac event. Patients with AC-SSS 1-3 and AC-SSS 4-8 had similar cardiac event rates (11.4% vs 10.5%, P = NS). Accordingly, AC-SSS cutoffs of 0, 1-8, and >8 were selected to classify perfusion as normal, mildly abnormal, and moderately to severely abnormal with annualized event rates of 2.1%, 10.8%, and 18.7%, respectively (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, AC-SSS >8 was the most powerful predictor of cardiac events followed by AC-SSS 1-8, history of CAD, age >75 and pharmacologic stress. CONCLUSIONS: AC provides powerful risk stratification when added to clinical variables in patients undergoing stress Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging without ECG-gating. Moreover, smaller/less severe defects on AC data are more significant than if the same defects were seen on non-AC data.
BACKGROUND: Despite growing recognition of attenuation correction (AC) utilizing an external radiation source, prognostic studies using AC are lacking. METHODS: Consecutive patients (n = 419) who underwent stress Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging with AC but without ECG-gating, due to arrhythmia, were followed for cardiac death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI). A 17-segment model and the summed stress score (SSS) were used to classify both the non-AC and AC images. RESULTS: The 419 patients had a mean age of 71.5 +/- 11.7 years and most (70.6%) underwent pharmacologic stress. In follow-up, 35 (8.4%) patients suffered an adverse cardiac event. Patients with AC-SSS 1-3 and AC-SSS 4-8 had similar cardiac event rates (11.4% vs 10.5%, P = NS). Accordingly, AC-SSS cutoffs of 0, 1-8, and >8 were selected to classify perfusion as normal, mildly abnormal, and moderately to severely abnormal with annualized event rates of 2.1%, 10.8%, and 18.7%, respectively (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, AC-SSS >8 was the most powerful predictor of cardiac events followed by AC-SSS 1-8, history of CAD, age >75 and pharmacologic stress. CONCLUSIONS:AC provides powerful risk stratification when added to clinical variables in patients undergoing stress Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging without ECG-gating. Moreover, smaller/less severe defects on AC data are more significant than if the same defects were seen on non-AC data.
Authors: Christopher L Hansen; Richard A Goldstein; Daniel S Berman; Keith B Churchwell; C David Cooke; James R Corbett; S James Cullom; Seth T Dahlberg; James R Galt; Ravi K Garg; Gary V Heller; Mark C Hyun; Lynne L Johnson; April Mann; Benjamin D McCallister; Raymond Taillefer; R Parker Ward; John J Mahmarian Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Yasmin Masood; Yi-Hwa Liu; Gordon Depuey; Raymond Taillefer; Luis I Araujo; Steven Allen; Dominique Delbeke; Frank Anstett; Aharon Peretz; Mary-Jo Zito; Vera Tsatkin; Frans J Th Wackers Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: R Hachamovitch; D S Berman; L J Shaw; H Kiat; I Cohen; J A Cabico; J Friedman; G A Diamond Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-02-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: R Hachamovitch; D S Berman; H Kiat; I Cohen; H Lewin; A Amanullah; X Kang; J Friedman; G A Diamond Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 1997-08-15 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: D S Berman; R Hachamovitch; H Kiat; I Cohen; J A Cabico; F P Wang; J D Friedman; G Germano; K Van Train; G A Diamond Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1995-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: G V Heller; S D Herman; M I Travin; J I Baron; C Santos-Ocampo; J R McClellan Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1995-11-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Afrooz Ardestani; Alan W Ahlberg; Deborah M Katten; Krista Santilli; Donna M Polk; Timothy M Bateman; Gary V Heller Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-11-21 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Manish Motwani; William D Leslie; Andrew L Goertzen; Yuka Otaki; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Marisa C G Tjong Joe Wai; Machiel J M Ottenhof; Hendrik J Boiten; Roelf Valkema; Ron T van Domburg; Arend F L Schinkel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-10-17 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Shishir Mathur; Gary V Heller; Timothy M Bateman; Richard Ruffin; Arshad Yekta; Deborah Katten; Nitya Alluri; Alan W Ahlberg Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-11-28 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Arend F L Schinkel; Henk J Boiten; Jors N van der Sijde; Pauline R Ruitinga; Eric J G Sijbrands; Roelf Valkema; Ron T van Domburg Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-06-08 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Hendrik J Boiten; Johannes N van der Sijde; Pauline R Ruitinga; Roelf Valkema; Marcel L Geleijnse; Eric J G Sijbrands; Ron T van Domburg; Arend F L Schinkel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 5.952