BACKGROUND: The diagnostic sensitivity of various SPECT MPI procedures was assessed using a pumping cardiac phantom with variable defects inserted in the myocardial wall of the left ventricle. METHODS AND RESULTS: A diagnostic evaluation of 142 myocardial defects was performed. A diagnosis blinded to prior-known conditions was compared to the known defects severity (transmural, subendocardial) and defects position within the myocardial wall of the left ventricle (apical, anterior, inferior) for three body types (average male, large male, large female). Non-attenuation corrected, attenuation corrected and gated SPECT MPI were performed. The diagnostic sensitivity was improved when applying attenuation correction or gating techniques to identify subendocardial defects in the inferior, anterior and apical segments of the myocardial wall of the left ventricle for all three body types. Transmural defects could be identified without any attenuation correction or gating. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic sensitivity was improved when applying AC or GSPECT techniques.
BACKGROUND: The diagnostic sensitivity of various SPECT MPI procedures was assessed using a pumping cardiac phantom with variable defects inserted in the myocardial wall of the left ventricle. METHODS AND RESULTS: A diagnostic evaluation of 142 myocardial defects was performed. A diagnosis blinded to prior-known conditions was compared to the known defects severity (transmural, subendocardial) and defects position within the myocardial wall of the left ventricle (apical, anterior, inferior) for three body types (average male, large male, large female). Non-attenuation corrected, attenuation corrected and gated SPECT MPI were performed. The diagnostic sensitivity was improved when applying attenuation correction or gating techniques to identify subendocardial defects in the inferior, anterior and apical segments of the myocardial wall of the left ventricle for all three body types. Transmural defects could be identified without any attenuation correction or gating. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic sensitivity was improved when applying AC or GSPECT techniques.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Aju P Pazhenkottil; Jelena-Rima Ghadri; Rene N Nkoulou; Mathias Wolfrum; Ronny R Buechel; Silke M Küest; Lars Husmann; Bernhard A Herzog; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Véronique L Roger; Alan S Go; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Emelia J Benjamin; Jarett D Berry; William B Borden; Dawn M Bravata; Shifan Dai; Earl S Ford; Caroline S Fox; Heather J Fullerton; Cathleen Gillespie; Susan M Hailpern; John A Heit; Virginia J Howard; Brett M Kissela; Steven J Kittner; Daniel T Lackland; Judith H Lichtman; Lynda D Lisabeth; Diane M Makuc; Gregory M Marcus; Ariane Marelli; David B Matchar; Claudia S Moy; Dariush Mozaffarian; Michael E Mussolino; Graham Nichol; Nina P Paynter; Elsayed Z Soliman; Paul D Sorlie; Nona Sotoodehnia; Tanya N Turan; Salim S Virani; Nathan D Wong; Daniel Woo; Melanie B Turner Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-12-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Henrik Hussein El-Ali; John Palmer; Marcus Carlsson; Lars Edenbrandt; Michael Ljungberg Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: Gary V Heller; Timothy M Bateman; Lynne L Johnson; S James Cullom; James A Case; James R Galt; Ernest V Garcia; Keith Haddock; Kelly L Moutray; Carlos Poston; Eli H Botvinick; Matthews B Fish; William P Follansbee; Sean Hayes; Ami E Iskandrian; John J Mahmarian; William Vandecker Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Arik Wolak; Piotr J Slomka; Mathews B Fish; Santiago Lorenzo; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 10.057