Jorge Daniel Oldan1,2, Linda K Shaw3, Paul Hofmann3, Matthew Phelan3, Jeffrey Nelson4, Robert Pagnanelli5, Salvador Borges-Neto5. 1. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, USA. joldan9@gmail.com. 2. , 11328 Euclid Avenue, Apt. 303, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. joldan9@gmail.com. 3. Duke Clinical Research Institute, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. 4. Clinical Imaging Physics Group, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. 5. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, 2301 Erwin Road, Durham, NC, 27710, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New multipinhole cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) cameras allow for faster imaging and lower radiation doses for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) studies, but assessment of prognostic ability is necessary. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected data from all myocardial SPECT perfusion studies performed over 15 months at our institution, using either a CZT or conventional Anger camera. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the relationship between camera type, imaging results, and either death or myocardial infarction (MI). Clinical variables including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and historical risk factors were used for population description and model adjustments. We had 2,088 patients with a total of 69 deaths and 65 MIs (122 events altogether). A 3% increase in DDB (difference defect burden) represented a 12% increase in the risk of death or MI, whereas a 3% increase in rest defect burden or stress defect burden represented an 8% increase; these risks were the same for both cameras (P > .24, interaction tests). CONCLUSIONS: The CZT camera has similar prognostic values for death and MI to conventional Anger cameras. This suggests that it may successfully be used to decrease patient dose.
BACKGROUND: New multipinhole cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) cameras allow for faster imaging and lower radiation doses for single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) studies, but assessment of prognostic ability is necessary. METHODS AND RESULTS: We collected data from all myocardial SPECT perfusion studies performed over 15 months at our institution, using either a CZT or conventional Anger camera. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the relationship between camera type, imaging results, and either death or myocardial infarction (MI). Clinical variables including age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and historical risk factors were used for population description and model adjustments. We had 2,088 patients with a total of 69 deaths and 65 MIs (122 events altogether). A 3% increase in DDB (difference defect burden) represented a 12% increase in the risk of death or MI, whereas a 3% increase in rest defect burden or stress defect burden represented an 8% increase; these risks were the same for both cameras (P > .24, interaction tests). CONCLUSIONS: The CZT camera has similar prognostic values for death and MI to conventional Anger cameras. This suggests that it may successfully be used to decrease patient dose.
Entities:
Keywords:
CZT; Evidence-based medicine; SPECT; outcomes; solid-state camera
Authors: Marilyn J Goske; Kimberly E Applegate; Jennifer Boylan; Penny F Butler; Michael J Callahan; Brian D Coley; Shawn Farley; Donald P Frush; Marta Hernanz-Schulman; Diego Jaramillo; Neil D Johnson; Sue C Kaste; Gregory Morrison; Keith J Strauss; Nora Tuggle Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2008-01-17
Authors: Stephan D Fihn; Julius M Gardin; Jonathan Abrams; Kathleen Berra; James C Blankenship; Apostolos P Dallas; Pamela S Douglas; Joanne M Foody; Thomas C Gerber; Alan L Hinderliter; Spencer B King; Paul D Kligfield; Harlan M Krumholz; Raymond Y K Kwong; Michael J Lim; Jane A Linderbaum; Michael J Mack; Mark A Munger; Richard L Prager; Joseph F Sabik; Leslee J Shaw; Joanna D Sikkema; Craig R Smith; Sidney C Smith; John A Spertus; Sankey V Williams Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-11-19 Impact factor: 29.690
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: Ryo Nakazato; Daniel S Berman; Heidi Gransar; Mark Hyun; Romalisa Miranda-Peats; Faith C Kite; Sean W Hayes; Louise E J Thomson; John D Friedman; Alan Rozanski; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-10-12 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: D B Mark; L Shaw; F E Harrell; M A Hlatky; K L Lee; J R Bengtson; C B McCants; R M Califf; D B Pryor Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-09-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Machiel J M Ottenhof; Marisa C G Tjong Joe Wai; Hendrik J Boiten; Rebecca S Korbee; Roelf Valkema; Ron T van Domburg; Arend F L Schinkel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2013-08-03 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: D B Pryor; L Shaw; C B McCants; K L Lee; D B Mark; F E Harrell; L H Muhlbaier; R M Califf Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1993-01-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Ronaldo S L Lima; Thaís R Peclat; Ana Carolina A H Souza; Aline M K Nakamoto; Felipe M Neves; Victor F Souza; Letícia B Glerian; Andrea De Lorenzo Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-06-29 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Luiz Eduardo Mastrocola; Barbara Juarez Amorim; João Vicente Vitola; Simone Cristina Soares Brandão; Gabriel Blacher Grossman; Ronaldo de Souza Leão Lima; Rafael Willain Lopes; William Azem Chalela; Lara Cristiane Terra Ferreira Carreira; José Roberto Nolasco de Araújo; Cláudio Tinoco Mesquita; José Claudio Meneghetti Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020-02 Impact factor: 2.000