Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31089962›Full record

SynthesisJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2021

Diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion imaging with conventional and CZT single-photon emission computed tomography in detecting coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis.

Valeria Cantoni, Roberta Green, Wanda Acampa, Emilia Zampella, Roberta Assante, Carmela Nappi, Valeria Gaudieri, Teresa Mannarino, Renato Cuocolo, Eugenio Di Vaia and 2 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Deep learning-based obstructive coronary artery disease prediction from myocardial perfusion SPECT.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Myocardial perfusion reserve by CZT cameras: A journey inside coronary microvascular circulation. Is it time to leave yet?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  13. Revascularization of non-culprit lesions: A common dilemma.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  14. The addition of coronary artery calcium to myocardial perfusion: Double or nothing?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  15. Prognostic value of combined coronary angiography-derived IMR and myocardial perfusion imaging by CZT SPECT in INOCA.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
  16. Editorial: Insights in PET and SPECT: 2023.Frontiers in nuclear medicine · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Prone-only SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging: An alternative standard in clinical practice?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  20. Is the CZT technology the future of nuclear cardiology?Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Valeria Cantoni *Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Roberta Green *Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Wanda AcampaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Emilia ZampellaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Roberta AssanteDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Carmela NappiDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Valeria GaudieriDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Teresa MannarinoDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Renato CuocoloDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Eugenio Di VaiaDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy.
Mario PetrettaDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Alberto CuocoloDepartment of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University Federico II, Via Pansini 5, 80131, Naples, Italy. cuocolo@unina.it.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe performed a meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic performance of conventional SPECT (C-SPECT) and cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT)-SPECT systems in detecting angiographically proven coronary artery disease (CAD).

methodsStudies published between January 2000 and February 2018 were identified by database search. We included studies assessing C-SPECT or CZT-SPECT as a diagnostic test to evaluate patients for the presence of CAD, defined as at least 50% diameter stenosis on invasive coronary angiography. A study was eligible regardless of whether patients were referred for suspected or known CAD.

resultsWe identified 40 eligible articles (25 C-SPECT and 15 CZT-SPECT studies) including 7334 patients (4997 in C-SPECT and 2337 in CZT-SPECT studies). The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 85% and 66% for C-SPECT and 89% and 69% for CZT-SPECT imaging studies. The area under the curve was slightly higher for CZT-SPECT (0.89) compared to C-SPECT (0.83); accordingly, the summary diagnostic OR was 17 for CZT-SPECT and 11 for C-SPECT. The accuracy of the two tests slightly differs between C-SPECT and CZT-SPECT (chi-square 11.28, P < .05). At meta-regression analysis, no significant association between both sensitivity and specificity and demographical and clinical variables considered was found for C-SPECT and CZT-SPECT studies.

conclusionsC-SPECT and CZT-SPECT have good diagnostic performance in detecting angiographic proven CAD, with a slightly higher accuracy for CZT-SPECT. This result supports the use of the novel gamma cameras in clinical routine practices also considering the improvements in acquisition time and radiation exposure reduction.

Indexed as

CadmiumCoronary Artery DiseaseGamma CamerasHumansMyocardial Perfusion ImagingQuality Assurance, Health CareTelluriumTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonZincCadmiumCdZnTeTelluriumZincCADdiagnostic applicationmeta-analysisMPISPECT

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.