ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2012
Comparison of nitrate augmented Tc-99m tetrofosmin gated SPECT imaging with FDG PET imaging for the assessment of myocardial viability in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Hybrid PET/MRI for inflammatory cardiomyopathy].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- Application of animal and human PET in cardiac research.American journal of cardiovascular disease · 2018Review
- Diagnostic value of (18)F-FDG PET in the assessment of myocardial viability in coronary artery disease: A comparative study with (99m)Tc SPECT and echocardiography.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2014Article
- [Diagnostic work-up of coronary artery disease: Clinical value of different imaging methods].Herz · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOf various nuclear medicine techniques, F-18/flourodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) is considered as the best modality for the assessment of viable myocardium (VM). In this study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy of nitrate augmented Tc-99m tetrofosmin gated G-single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) with FDG PET.
methods54 consecutive cases of angiographically proven CAD with severe LV dysfunction were enrolled in the study. The patients underwent Tc-99m tetrofosmin G-SPECT and FDG PET as per the standard protocols and were compared.
resultsSPECT data analysis indicated functional abnormalities in 661/918 myocardial segments. F-18 FDG PET revealed VM in 496/661 segments. The diagnostic accuracy of baseline NAC, postnitrate NAC, baseline AC, and postnitrate AC Tc-99m tetrofosmin SPECT was 84%, 87%, 90%, and 94%, respectively. κ values for NAC baseline, NAC postnitrate, AC baseline, and AC postnitrate Tc-99m tetrofosmin G-SPECT were 0.65, 0.70, 0.77, and 0.85, respectively. Attenuation correction revealed viability additionally in 46 segments which were non-viable on NAC postnitrate study (P < .001). Nitrate augmentation showed viability additionally in 25 segments which were non-viable on AC baseline scan (P = .004). On patient-based analysis FDG PET changes the management only in 13% (7/54) of patients.
conclusionsNitrate augmented AC Tc-99m tetrofosmin G-SPECT shows excellent (κ = .85) agreement with FDG PET. FDG PET changes management only in 13% of the patients. Tc-99m tetrofosmin G-SPECT being more widely available and cheaper imaging modality can be reliably used to detect VM where FDG PET is not available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.