BACKGROUND: The 2005 appropriate use criteria (AUC) for stress single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI) were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in published evidence, clinical practice and experience with application of the 2005 AUC. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2009 AUC for SPECT MPI with the original 2005 criteria. METHODS: Using the Mayo Rochester Nuclear Cardiology Laboratory database, we retrospectively examined 281 patients who underwent stress SPECT MPI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between May 1, 2005, and May 15, 2005, using the revised 2009 AUC and compared these findings to our previously published results in this same cohort using the 2005 AUC. RESULTS: Compared to the 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC resulted in a highly significant overall change (P < .001) in the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, reduced appropriate studies (59.8% vs 63.7%, P = .02), increased studies of uncertain appropriateness (16.0% vs 10.7%, P = .01), and increased inappropriate studies (24.2% vs 14.6%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients undergoing SPECT MPI, compared to our previous study using the original 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC had a significant impact on the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, increased inappropriate studies and increased studies of uncertain appropriateness. Copyright 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The 2005 appropriate use criteria (AUC) for stress single-photon emission computed tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT MPI) were revised in 2009 to reflect changes in published evidence, clinical practice and experience with application of the 2005 AUC. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2009 AUC for SPECT MPI with the original 2005 criteria. METHODS: Using the Mayo Rochester Nuclear Cardiology Laboratory database, we retrospectively examined 281 patients who underwent stress SPECT MPI at Mayo Clinic Rochester between May 1, 2005, and May 15, 2005, using the revised 2009 AUC and compared these findings to our previously published results in this same cohort using the 2005 AUC. RESULTS: Compared to the 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC resulted in a highly significant overall change (P < .001) in the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, reduced appropriate studies (59.8% vs 63.7%, P = .02), increased studies of uncertain appropriateness (16.0% vs 10.7%, P = .01), and increased inappropriate studies (24.2% vs 14.6%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of patients undergoing SPECT MPI, compared to our previous study using the original 2005 AUC, the 2009 AUC had a significant impact on the classification of appropriateness. The 2009 AUC eliminated unclassified patients, increased inappropriate studies and increased studies of uncertain appropriateness. Copyright 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Islam Y Elgendy; Ahmed Mahmoud; Jonathan J Shuster; Rami Doukky; David E Winchester Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-08-08 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Rami Doukky; Nathan Frogge; Gautam Balakrishnan; Kathleen Hayes; Fareed Moses Collado; Maria O Rangel; Richard G Trohman; Robert C Hendel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-03-09 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Leslee J Shaw; Ron Blankstein; Jill E Jacobs; Jonathon A Leipsic; Raymond Y Kwong; Viviany R Taqueti; Rob S B Beanlands; Jennifer H Mieres; Scott D Flamm; Thomas C Gerber; John Spertus; Marcelo F Di Carli Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Joseph A Ladapo; Saul Blecker; Michael O'Donnell; Saahil A Jumkhawala; Pamela S Douglas Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-08-18 Impact factor: 3.240