| Literature DB >> 33442819 |
Mariano Pontico1, Gabriele Brunotti1, Miriam Conte1, Ferdinando Corica1, Laura Cosma1, Cristina De Angelis1, Maria Silvia De Feo1, Julia Lazri1, Antonio Matto1, Melissa Montebello1, Arianna Di Rocco2, Viviana Frantellizzi3, Alessio Farcomeni4, Giuseppe De Vincentis1.
Abstract
This systematic review aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of Iodine123 Metaiodobenzylguanidine (123I-mIBG) SPECT myocardial imaging in patients with heart failure (HF) and to assess whether semi-quantitative SPECT scores can be useful for accurate risk stratification concerning arrhythmic event (AE) and sudden cardiac death (SCD) in this cohort. A systematic literature search of studies published until November 2020 regarding the application of 123I-mIBG SPECT in HF patients was performed, in Pubmed, Scopus, Medline, Central (Cochrane Library) and Web Of Science databases, including the words "MIBG", "metaiodobenzylguanidine", "heart", "spect", and "tomographic". The included studies had to correlate 123I-mIBG SPECT scores with endpoints such as overall survival and prevention of AE and SCD in HF patients. According to the sixteen studies included, the analysis showed that 123I-mIBG SPECT scores, such as summed defect score (SDS), regional wash-out (rWO), and regional myocardial tracer uptake, could have a reliable prognostic value in patients with HF. An increased SDS or rWO, as well as a reduced 123I-mIBG myocardial uptake, have proven to be effective in predicting AE- and SCD-specific risk in HF patients. Despite achieved results being promising, a more reproducible standardized method for semi-quantitative analysis and further studies with larger cohort are needed for 123I-mIBG SPECT myocardial imaging to be as reliable and, thus, accepted as the conventional 123I-mIBG planar myocardial imaging.Entities:
Keywords: 123I-mIBG; SPECT; arrhythmic event; heart failure; sudden cardiac death
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33442819 PMCID: PMC9345809 DOI: 10.1007/s12350-020-02501-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Nucl Cardiol ISSN: 1071-3581 Impact factor: 3.872
Figure 1Study selection flow chart
123I-mIBG SPECT acquisition parameters of the included studies.
| Authors | Acquisition time after injection (Min) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Early | Late | Collimator | Matrix | |
| Somsen et al. | / | 240 | MEHR | 64 × 64 |
| Travin et al. | 10-15 | 230 | LEHR | ns |
| Van Der Veen et al. | 15 | 240 | LEHR | 128 × 128 |
| Yamamoto et al. | 20 | 200 | LEHR | 128 × 128 |
| Clements et al. | ns | ns | ns | ns |
| Jacobson et al. | 15 | 230 | LEHR | 64 × 64 |
| Jacobson et al. | 25 | 240 | MEHR | ns |
| Kasama et al. | 15 | 240 | LEHR | 128 × 128 |
| Marshall et al. | 10-15 | 180-240 | MEHR | 64 × 64 |
| Verschure et al. | 15 | 240 | LEHR | 256 × 256 |
| Hage et al. | 15 | 230 | LEHR | 128 × 128 |
| Iqbal et al. | 15 | 240 | LEHR | 256 × 256 |
| Boogers et al. | 30 | 180-240 | LEHR | 128 × 128 |
| De Vincentis et al. | 25 | 250 | LEHR | 64 × 64 |
| Sazonova et al. | 15 | 240 | LEHR | 64 × 64 |
| Doi et al. | 15-30 | 240 | LEHR | ns |
/ not reported; ns not specified; LEHR low energy high resolution; MEHR medium energy high resolution.
Characteristics of the included studies and 123I-mIBG SPECT results evaluation method.
| Authors | Score | Evaluation scale | Polar map (segments) | Population |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Boogers et. al. | ESS 21.6 ± 10.1 | 0-4 | 17 | 116 CHF |
| LSS 26.8±10.0 | ||||
| De Vincentis et al. | ESS 31.4±11.9 | 0-4 | 17 | 170 CHF |
| LSS 36.2±12.3 | ||||
| DSS − 4.74±8.6 | ||||
| Verschure et al. | LSS 39.4 ± 15.5 | 0-4 | 17 | 111 CHF |
| Iqbal et al. | ESS / LSS / MUP | 0-4 | 20 | 22 CHF |
| Jacobson et al. | SS | 0-4 | 17 | 985 CHF |
| Jacobson et al. | / | 0-4 | 17 | 961 CHF |
| Marshall et al. | SDS 29.5±9.9 | / | / | 27 CHF |
| MS 11.9±8.0 | ||||
| Somsen et al. | / | / | / | 16 CHF |
| Travin et al. | ESS 41.2±12.4 | 0-4 | 17 | 471 CHF |
| PS 19.2±11.3 | ||||
| MS 22.5±12.8 | ||||
| Van der Veen et al. | / | / | / | 54 patients 28 CHF |
| Kasama et al. | LSS | 0-4 | 17 | 208 CHF |
| Clements et al. | SDyS | 0-4 | 17 | 938 HF |
| Doi et al. | / | / | 17 | 468 HF |
| Yamamoto et al. | SSS | 0-4 | 17 | 73 CHF |
| Hage et al. | / | / | / | 917 HF |
| Sazonova et al. | ESS 21-18 | 0-4 | 20 | 80 CHF |
| LSS 24-20 |
/ not reported; CHF congestive heart failure; HF heart failure; ESS early summed score; LSS late summed score; DSS defect summed score; MUP myocardial uptake indices; MS (perfusion/innervation) mismatch score; PS perfusion score; WR wash-out rate; UR uptake ratio; SDyS segment dysinnervation score; SSS stress summed score
Tabular representation of quality assessment results
| Study | Risk of bias | Applicability concerns | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient selection | Index test | Reference standard | Flow and timing | Patient selection | Index test | Reference standard | |
| Boogers et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☹ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| De Vincentis et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Verschure et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Marshall et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☹ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Travin et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Doi et al. | ☹ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ? | ☺ |
| Yamamoto et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Iqbal et al. | ? | ☹ | ? | ? | ☹ | ☹ | ☺ |
| Jacobson et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Somsen et al. | ? | ☹ | ☹ | ? | ☹ | ☺ | ☹ |
| Jacobson et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Van der veen et al. | ☹ | ? | ? | ? | ☹ | ☹ | ☹ |
| Hage et al. | ? | ? | ☺ | ☺ | ? | ☹ | ☺ |
| Clements et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Kasama et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☹ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
| Sazonova et al. | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ | ☺ |
☺Low risk; ☹High risk; ?Unclear risk
Figure 2(A) Risk of bias assessment through Quadas2 for each study. (B) Results of risk of bias assessment through Quadas2 along with its graphic representation
Figure 3(A) Applicability concerns assessment through Quadas2 for each study. (B) Results of applicability concerns assessment through Quadas2 along with its graphic representation