Assessment of left ventricular function with gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and gated myocardial FDG PET in patients with left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony (LVMD) and left ventricular function are intertwined. Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) and gated fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission computed tomography (FDG PET) is an elegant way for repeated assessment of myocardial dyssynchrony and myocardial function. To the knowledge of the authors at the time this manuscript was prepared, there was no comprehensive evaluation of the interplay of LVMD and left ventricular function as measured by gated MPS and gated FDG PET; as well as no evaluation of the agreement between the two methods. METHODS: Patients were assigned to the reference cohort (RC) and the dyssynchrony cohort (DC) based on the phase analysis results of gated MPS datasets. Subsequently left ventricular function was analyzed. RESULTS: We demonstrated that LVMD as detected by gated MPS is associated with a significantly higher end-diastolic volume (EDV) and end-systolic volume (ESV) as well as a significantly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) both in gated MPS and gated FDG PET imaging. In the RC and the DC SPECT and PET showed good agreement and generally high linear correlations with regard to left ventricular volumes and LVEF. In the combined cohort (RC and DC) increasing amounts of LVMD were associated with increasing left ventricular volumes as well as a decreasing LVEF. The association was strongest for the dyssynchrony parameter Entropy. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that gated SPECT and gated PET are useful tools in the evaluation of left ventricular function in patients with LVMD as detected by gated MPS. Increasing amounts of dyssynchrony were associated with an increasingly reduced myocardial function. For repeated measurements or therapy monitoring, the methods should not be used interchangeably.

Multicentre multi-device hybrid imaging study of coronary artery disease: results from the EValuation of INtegrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischaemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) hybrid imaging population.

AIMS: Hybrid imaging provides a non-invasive assessment of coronary anatomy and myocardial perfusion. We sought to evaluate the added clinical value of hybrid imaging in a multi-centre multi-vendor setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fourteen centres enrolled 252 patients with stable angina and intermediate (20-90%) pre-test likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS), CT coronary angiography (CTCA), and quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) with fractional flow reserve (FFR). Hybrid MPS/CTCA images were obtained by 3D image fusion. Blinded core-lab analyses were performed for CTCA, MPS, QCA and hybrid datasets. Hemodynamically significant CAD was ruled-in non-invasively in the presence of a matched finding (myocardial perfusion defect co-localized with stenosed coronary artery) and ruled-out with normal findings (both CTCA and MPS normal). Overall prevalence of significant CAD on QCA (>70% stenosis or 30-70% with FFR≤0.80) was 37%. Of 1004 pathological myocardial segments on MPS, 246 (25%) were reclassified from their standard coronary distribution to another territory by hybrid imaging. In this respect, in 45/252 (18%) patients, hybrid imaging reassigned an entire perfusion defect to another coronary territory, changing the final diagnosis in 42% of the cases. Hybrid imaging allowed non-invasive CAD rule-out in 41%, and rule-in in 24% of patients, with a negative and positive predictive value of 88% and 87%, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients at intermediate risk of CAD, hybrid imaging allows non-invasive co-localization of myocardial perfusion defects and subtending coronary arteries, impacting clinical decision-making in almost one every five subjects.

Detection of significant coronary artery disease by noninvasive anatomical and functional imaging.

BACKGROUND: The choice of imaging techniques in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD) varies between countries, regions, and hospitals. This prospective, multicenter, comparative effectiveness study was designed to assess the relative accuracy of commonly used imaging techniques for identifying patients with significant CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 475 patients with stable chest pain and intermediate likelihood of CAD underwent coronary computed tomographic angiography and stress myocardial perfusion imaging by single photon emission computed tomography or positron emission tomography, and ventricular wall motion imaging by stress echocardiography or cardiac magnetic resonance. If ≥1 test was abnormal, patients underwent invasive coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined by invasive coronary angiography as >50% stenosis of the left main stem, >70% stenosis in a major coronary vessel, or 30% to 70% stenosis with fractional flow reserve ≤0.8. Significant CAD was present in 29% of patients. In a patient-based analysis, coronary computed tomographic angiography had the highest diagnostic accuracy, the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve being 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.88-0.94), sensitivity being 91%, and specificity being 92%. Myocardial perfusion imaging had good diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve, 0.74; confidence interval, 0.69-0.78), sensitivity 74%, and specificity 73%. Wall motion imaging had similar accuracy (area under the curve, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.65-0.75) but lower sensitivity (49%, P<0.001) and higher specificity (92%, P<0.001). The diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging and wall motion imaging were lower than that of coronary computed tomographic angiography (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a multicenter European population of patients with stable chest pain and low prevalence of CAD, coronary computed tomographic angiography is more accurate than noninvasive functional testing for detecting significant CAD defined invasively. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00979199.