Diagnostic accuracy for CZT gamma camera compared to conventional gamma camera technique with myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography: Assessment of myocardial infarction and function.

CAD Gated SPECT MPI MRI Myocardial ischemia and infarction SPECT

Journal

Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology
ISSN: 1532-6551
Titre abrégé: J Nucl Cardiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9423534

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Historique:
received: 01 04 2022
accepted: 23 11 2022
medline: 21 1 2024
pubmed: 21 1 2024
entrez: 20 1 2024
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The solid-state cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) gamma camera for myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (MPS) has theoretical advantages compared to the conventional gamma camera technique. This includes more sensitive detectors and better energy resolution. We aimed to explore the diagnostic performance of gated MPS with a CZT gamma camera compared to a conventional gamma camera for detection of myocardial infarct (MI) and assessment of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (LVEF), using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) as the reference method. Seventy-three patients (26% female) with known or suspected chronic coronary syndrome were examined with gated MPS using both a CZT gamma camera and a conventional gamma camera as well as with CMR. Presence and extent of MI on MPS and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) CMR was evaluated. For LV volumes, LVEF and LV mass, gated MPS images and cine CMR images were evaluated. MI was found in 42 patients on CMR. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the CZT and the conventional gamma camera were the same (67%, 100%, 100% and 69%). For infarct size > 3% on CMR, the sensitivity was 82% for the CZT and 73% for the conventional gamma camera, respectively. LV volumes were significantly underestimated by MPS compared to CMR (P ≤ .002 for all measures). The underestimation was slightly less pronounced for the CZT compared to the conventional gamma camera (2-10 mL, P ≤ .03 for all measures). For LVEF, however, accuracy was high for both gamma cameras. Differences between a CZT and a conventional gamma camera for detection of MI and assessment of LV volumes and LVEF are small and do not appear to be clinically significant.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The solid-state cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) gamma camera for myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography (MPS) has theoretical advantages compared to the conventional gamma camera technique. This includes more sensitive detectors and better energy resolution. We aimed to explore the diagnostic performance of gated MPS with a CZT gamma camera compared to a conventional gamma camera for detection of myocardial infarct (MI) and assessment of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (LVEF), using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) as the reference method.
METHODS METHODS
Seventy-three patients (26% female) with known or suspected chronic coronary syndrome were examined with gated MPS using both a CZT gamma camera and a conventional gamma camera as well as with CMR. Presence and extent of MI on MPS and late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) CMR was evaluated. For LV volumes, LVEF and LV mass, gated MPS images and cine CMR images were evaluated.
RESULTS RESULTS
MI was found in 42 patients on CMR. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the CZT and the conventional gamma camera were the same (67%, 100%, 100% and 69%). For infarct size > 3% on CMR, the sensitivity was 82% for the CZT and 73% for the conventional gamma camera, respectively. LV volumes were significantly underestimated by MPS compared to CMR (P ≤ .002 for all measures). The underestimation was slightly less pronounced for the CZT compared to the conventional gamma camera (2-10 mL, P ≤ .03 for all measures). For LVEF, however, accuracy was high for both gamma cameras.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Differences between a CZT and a conventional gamma camera for detection of MI and assessment of LV volumes and LVEF are small and do not appear to be clinically significant.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38245138
pii: S1071-3581(24)00116-8
doi: 10.1007/s12350-022-03185-0
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1935-1946

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 THE AUTHORS. Published by ELSEVIER INC. on behalf of American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.

Auteurs

Fredrik Hedeer (F)

Department of Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden. Electronic address: fredrik.hedeer@med.lu.se.

Shahnaz Akil (S)

Department of Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Jenny Oddstig (J)

Radiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

Cecilia Hindorf (C)

Radiation Physics, Department of Hematology, Oncology and Radiation Physics, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

Håkan Arheden (H)

Department of Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Marcus Carlsson (M)

Department of Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Henrik Engblom (H)

Department of Clinical Physiology, Skåne University Hospital, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.

Classifications MeSH