OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to assess mIBG uptake in scar border zone and its relation with ventricular arrhythmia (VA) inducibility on electrophysiology (EP) testing using I-123 mIBG SPECT and resting Tc-99m SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: Forty-seven patients from a previous clinical trial were retrospectively analyzed. These patients underwent I-123 mIBG and resting Tc-99m tetrofosmin SPECT, and EP testing. Twenty-eight patients were positive (EP+) and 19 patients were negative (EP-) for inducibility of sustained (>30 seconds) VA on EP testing. MPI scar extent, border zone extent, and mIBG uptake in border zone were used to predict VA inducibility on EP testing, respectively. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in scar extent between the EP+ and EP- groups. The EP+ group had significantly larger border zone and lower mIBG uptake ratio in the border zone than the EP- group. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the prediction accuracy for border zone extent (area under ROC = 0.75) was better than scar extent (area under ROC = 0.66). The prediction accuracy was further improved (area under ROC = 0.78), when assessing mIBG uptake in the border zone. CONCLUSION: A new tool has been developed to measure scar and border zone and to assess mIBG uptake in scar and border zone from combined I-123 MIBG SPECT and resting Tc-99m SPECT MPI. The mIBG uptake in the border zone predicted VA inducibility on EP testing with a promising accuracy.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to assess mIBG uptake in scar border zone and its relation with ventricular arrhythmia (VA) inducibility on electrophysiology (EP) testing using I-123mIBG SPECT and resting Tc-99m SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI). METHODS: Forty-seven patients from a previous clinical trial were retrospectively analyzed. These patients underwent I-123mIBG and resting Tc-99m tetrofosmin SPECT, and EP testing. Twenty-eight patients were positive (EP+) and 19 patients were negative (EP-) for inducibility of sustained (>30 seconds) VA on EP testing. MPI scar extent, border zone extent, and mIBG uptake in border zone were used to predict VA inducibility on EP testing, respectively. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in scar extent between the EP+ and EP- groups. The EP+ group had significantly larger border zone and lower mIBG uptake ratio in the border zone than the EP- group. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis showed that the prediction accuracy for border zone extent (area under ROC = 0.75) was better than scar extent (area under ROC = 0.66). The prediction accuracy was further improved (area under ROC = 0.78), when assessing mIBG uptake in the border zone. CONCLUSION: A new tool has been developed to measure scar and border zone and to assess mIBG uptake in scar and border zone from combined I-123MIBG SPECT and resting Tc-99m SPECT MPI. The mIBG uptake in the border zone predicted VA inducibility on EP testing with a promising accuracy.
Authors: W G Stevenson; P L Friedman; P T Sager; L A Saxon; D Kocovic; T Harada; I Wiener; H Khan Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andrew E Epstein; John P DiMarco; Kenneth A Ellenbogen; N A Mark Estes; Roger A Freedman; Leonard S Gettes; A Marc Gillinov; Gabriel Gregoratos; Stephen C Hammill; David L Hayes; Mark A Hlatky; L Kristin Newby; Richard L Page; Mark H Schoenfeld; Michael J Silka; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Michael O Sweeney; Sidney C Smith; Alice K Jacobs; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; Christopher E Buller; Mark A Creager; Steven M Ettinger; David P Faxon; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon A Hunt; Harlan M Krumholz; Frederick G Kushner; Bruce W Lytle; Rick A Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel; Lynn G Tarkington; Clyde W Yancy Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-05-15 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Stijntje D Roes; C Jan Willem Borleffs; Rob J van der Geest; Jos J M Westenberg; Nina Ajmone Marsan; Theodorus A M Kaandorp; Johan H C Reiber; Katja Zeppenfeld; Hildo J Lamb; Albert de Roos; Martin J Schalij; Jeroen J Bax Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-03-23 Impact factor: 7.792
Authors: Andrew T Yan; Adolphe J Shayne; Kenneth A Brown; Sandeep N Gupta; Carmen W Chan; Tuan M Luu; Marcelo F Di Carli; H Glenn Reynolds; William G Stevenson; Raymond Y Kwong Journal: Circulation Date: 2006-06-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gust H Bardy; Kerry L Lee; Daniel B Mark; Jeanne E Poole; Douglas L Packer; Robin Boineau; Michael Domanski; Charles Troutman; Jill Anderson; George Johnson; Steven E McNulty; Nancy Clapp-Channing; Linda D Davidson-Ray; Elizabeth S Fraulo; Daniel P Fishbein; Richard M Luceri; John H Ip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-01-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Roy M John; Usha B Tedrow; Bruce A Koplan; Christine M Albert; Laurence M Epstein; Michael O Sweeney; Amy Leigh Miller; Gregory F Michaud; William G Stevenson Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-10-27 Impact factor: 79.321