Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 25
Filter
4.
Rev. esp. cardiol. (Ed. impr.) ; 74(4): 303-311, Abr. 2021. tab, graf, ilus
Article in English, Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-232235

ABSTRACT

Introducción y objetivos Los sistemas híbridos de tomografía por emisión de positrones (PET) y resonancia magnética (RM) son una tecnología prometedora para el diagnóstico por imagen, pero su aplicación cardiovascular en nuestro entorno clínico es desconocida. Nuestro objetivo es evaluar el valor de los equipos integrados de PET/RM frente a la RM y la PET por separado. Métodos Se incluyó prospectivamente a 49 pacientes, 30 para valoración de viabilidad miocárdica (grupo coronario) y 19 para estudio de enfermedad inflamatoria, infecciosa y tumoral (grupo no coronario), a los que se realizó una PET/RM cardiaca con 18F-fluorodesoxiglucosa, incluyendo secuencias de corrección de atenuación y, simultáneamente a la PET, secuencias de cine, caracterización tisular o realce tardío de RM, según indicación clínica. Resultados El 87,8% de los estudios de PET/RM fueron inicialmente interpretables. La PET/RM mejoró el diagnóstico en el 42,1% de los pacientes del grupo coronario respecto a la PET o la RM por separado, y en el 88,9% del grupo no coronario. De los casos no concluyentes según la RM o la PET, la PET/RM reclasificó a estudio diagnóstico al 87,5% de los pacientes del grupo coronario y el 70% de los del no coronario. Conclusiones En nuestra serie, la tecnología multimodal de PET/RM añade valor diagnóstico en algunos pacientes con enfermedad cardiovascular, sobre todo en enfermedad no coronaria y con hallazgos no concluyentes por RM o PET, y complementa cada técnica por separado. Los principales beneficios incluyen la adquisición simultánea, la integración de imágenes anatómicas, funcionales y metabólicas y la interacción entre distintos profesionales expertos en imagen. (AU)


Introduction and objectives Hybrid positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is an emerging technology in the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease; however, there have been no reports of its use in the national clinical setting. Our objective was to evaluate the additional value of integrated PET/MR systems compared with MR and PET performed separately in this setting. Methods We prospectively included 49 patients, 30 to assess myocardial viability (coronary group) and 19 to assess inflammatory, infectious, and tumoral diseases (noncoronary heart disease group). All patients underwent cardiac 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MR. PET/MR studies included attenuation correction sequences, followed by simultaneous cardiac PET and cardiac MR acquisition, with protocols adapted to the clinical indication (cine, tissue characterization and/or late enhancement imaging). Results Most (87.8%) PET/MR studies were initially interpretable. Use of PET/MR improved diagnosis vs PET or MR performed separately in 42.1% of coronary cases and 88.9% of noncoronary cases. PET/MR enabled reclassification of 87.5% of coronary cases initially classified as showing inconclusive results on MR or PET and 70% of noncoronary cases. Conclusions In our series, multimodality PET/MR technology provided additional diagnostic value in some patients with cardiovascular disease compared with MR and PET performed separately, especially in cases of noncoronary heart disease and in those with inconclusive results on MR or PET. In our experience, the main benefits of PET/MR include the possibility of simultaneous acquisition, the in vivo integration of anatomical/functional/metabolic aspects, and the interaction of different experts in imaging modalities. (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Positron-Emission Tomography/instrumentation , Positron-Emission Tomography/methods , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy/instrumentation , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy/methods , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Myocarditis/diagnostic imaging , Endocarditis/diagnostic imaging
5.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) ; 74(4): 303-311, 2021 Apr.
Article in English, Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32962969

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Hybrid positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is an emerging technology in the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease; however, there have been no reports of its use in the national clinical setting. Our objective was to evaluate the additional value of integrated PET/MR systems compared with MR and PET performed separately in this setting. METHODS: We prospectively included 49 patients, 30 to assess myocardial viability (coronary group) and 19 to assess inflammatory, infectious, and tumoral diseases (noncoronary heart disease group). All patients underwent cardiac 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MR. PET/MR studies included attenuation correction sequences, followed by simultaneous cardiac PET and cardiac MR acquisition, with protocols adapted to the clinical indication (cine, tissue characterization and/or late enhancement imaging). RESULTS: Most (87.8%) PET/MR studies were initially interpretable. Use of PET/MR improved diagnosis vs PET or MR performed separately in 42.1% of coronary cases and 88.9% of noncoronary cases. PET/MR enabled reclassification of 87.5% of coronary cases initially classified as showing inconclusive results on MR or PET and 70% of noncoronary cases. CONCLUSIONS: In our series, multimodality PET/MR technology provided additional diagnostic value in some patients with cardiovascular disease compared with MR and PET performed separately, especially in cases of noncoronary heart disease and in those with inconclusive results on MR or PET. In our experience, the main benefits of PET/MR include the possibility of simultaneous acquisition, the in vivo integration of anatomical/functional/metabolic aspects, and the interaction of different experts in imaging modalities.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Multimodal Imaging , Positron-Emission Tomography , Radiopharmaceuticals
14.
Arch. cardiol. Méx ; 88(4): 277-286, oct.-dic. 2018. tab, graf
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: biblio-1124149

ABSTRACT

Resumen Antecedentes: Los procedimientos coronarios invasivos conllevan la administración de contraste y la exposición a radiaciones ionizantes, comportando un incremento de la morbimortalidad. La angiografía coronaria rotacional (ACR) permite adquirir múltiples proyecciones con una inyección de contraste. Hasta la fecha, no hay metaanálisis específicos comparando la ACR y la angiografía coronaria convencional (ACC) en pacientes en los que se realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos, tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos. El objetivo de este metaanálisis es evaluar el impacto de la ACR en la cantidad de contraste, y la radiación ionizante en procedimientos coronarios invasivos. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed y Ovid para identificar estudios tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos que comparasen ACR y ACC. Los estudios fueron evaluados sobre la calidad y los sesgos, y fueron incluidos si contemplaban alguna de las siguientes variables de valoración: volumen de contraste, radiación ionizante medida como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire o tiempo de fluoroscopia. Resultados: Dieciséis estudios, totalizando 2,327 pacientes, fueron incluidos en el análisis final (1,146 pacientes recibieron ACR y 1,181, ACC), objetivándose diferencias significativas en volumen de contraste (diferencia estándar de medias (intervalo de confianza al 95%) −1.887 (−2.472 a −1.302); p < 0.001), producto dosis-área (−0.726 (−1.034 a −0.418); p < 0.001), Kerma-aire (−0.842 (−1.104 a −0.581); p < 0.001) y tiempo de fluoroscopia (0.263 (−0.496 a −0.030); p = 0.027). Conclusiones: La ACR permite reducir el volumen de contraste y la radiación, evaluada como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire y tiempo de fluoroscopia en pacientes a los que se les realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos.


Abstract Background: Invasive coronary procedures involve the administration of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations, increasing morbidity and mortality. The rotational coronary angiography (RCA) allows acquiring multiple projections with a unique injection of iodinated contrast. To date, there are no meta-analyses specifically comparing RCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures, whether diagnostic or diagnostic and therapeutic. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the impact of RCA on the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations during invasive coronary procedures. Methods: A search in PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted to identify studies, including diagnostic and diagnostic and therapeutic studies, comparing RCA and CCA. The manuscripts were evaluated on quality and biases, and were included if they analysed any of the following endpoints: volume of contrast and exposure to ionising radiations measured as dose-area product, and Kerma-air or fluoroscopy time. Results: Sixteen studies, with a total of 2,327 patients, were included in the final analysis (1,146 patients underwent RCA and 1,181 patients underwent CCA), with significant differences being detected in volume of contrast (standard difference in means (95% confidence interval) −1.887 (−2.472 to −1.302); P < .001), dose-area product (−0.726 (−1.034 to −0.418); P < .001), Kerma-air (−0.842 (−1.104 to −0.581); P < .001), and fluoroscopy time (0.263 (−0.496 to −0.030); P = .027). Conclusions: RCA reduces the volume of contrast and the exposure to radiation, evaluated as dose-area product, Kerma-air, and fluoroscopy time, in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures.


Subject(s)
Humans , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Angiography/methods , Contrast Media/administration & dosage , Radiation, Ionizing , Fluoroscopy , Iodine Compounds/administration & dosage
16.
Arch Cardiol Mex ; 88(4): 277-286, 2018.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28888725

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Invasive coronary procedures involve the administration of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations, increasing morbidity and mortality. The rotational coronary angiography (RCA) allows acquiring multiple projections with a unique injection of iodinated contrast. To date, there are no meta-analyses specifically comparing RCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures, whether diagnostic or diagnostic and therapeutic. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the impact of RCA on the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations during invasive coronary procedures. METHODS: A search in PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted to identify studies, including diagnostic and diagnostic and therapeutic studies, comparing RCA and CCA. The manuscripts were evaluated on quality and biases, and were included if they analysed any of the following endpoints: volume of contrast and exposure to ionising radiations measured as dose-area product, and Kerma-air or fluoroscopy time. RESULTS: Sixteen studies, with a total of 2,327 patients, were included in the final analysis (1,146 patients underwent RCA and 1,181 patients underwent CCA), with significant differences being detected in volume of contrast (standard difference in means [95% confidence interval] -1.887 [-2.472 to -1.302]; P<.001), dose-area product (-0.726 [-1.034 to -0.418]; P<.001), Kerma-air (-0.842 [-1.104 to -0.581]; P<.001), and fluoroscopy time (0.263 [-0.496 to -0.030]; P=.027). CONCLUSIONS: RCA reduces the volume of contrast and the exposure to radiation, evaluated as dose-area product, Kerma-air, and fluoroscopy time, in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures.


Subject(s)
Contrast Media/administration & dosage , Coronary Angiography/methods , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Fluoroscopy , Humans , Iodine Compounds/administration & dosage , Radiation, Ionizing
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...