medigraphic.com

2006, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Arch Cardiol Mex 2006; 76 (1)

Comparison of 18FDG PET with thallium SPECT in the assessment of myocardial viability. A segmental model analysis

Alexánderson E, Ricalde A, Romero-Ibarra JL, Meave A

Language: English
References: 25
Page: 9-15
PDF size: 69.72 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: In patients with myocardial infarction and left ventricular dysfunction, the evidence of myocardial viability is primordial. There are some methods to detect the presence of myocardial viability, 201 thallium reinjection SPECT protocol represents the most common radioisotopic technique to evaluate it. Positron emission tomography (PET) using FDG is considered the gold standard. The aim of this study was to compare globally and by segments the value of both techniques in the detection of viable myocardium. Methods: Twenty-three consecutive patients with previous myocardial infarction and left ventricular dysfunction were studied. All of them underwent into a SPECT perfusion scan and a FDG PET study to asses myocardial viability. Each study was performed in less than one week between the other. For the analysis, the myocardium was divided into 17 segments. A visual semi-quantitative analysis was carried out according to the following score indicating radiotracer uptake: O = normal to 4 = absent. Myocardial viability was defined as the presence of normal, mildly or moderately reduced radiotracer uptake. The scores obtained by PET were compared to those obtained in SPECT. A statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS v. 10. Results: 391 segments were analyzed. PET dysdetected viability in 130 segments that had been defined as non-viable by SPECT. No differences in the analysis by vascular territories were found. Thirty percent of the segments that were defined as non viable by SPECT were viable by PET, meanwhile only 1% of the segments detected viable by SPECT were considered non viable with PET. Conclusions: FDG PET study represents a better technique to detect myocardial viability, compared to thallium reinjection SPECT protocol. By this study we have demonstrated that more of 3 of each 10 studies may be diagnosed as non viable where viability is present.


REFERENCES

  1. MARWICK TH: The viable myocardium: epidemiology, detection and clinical implications. Lancet 1998; 351: 815-19.

  2. BONOW RO: Identification of viable myocardium. Circulation 1996; 94: 2674-80.

  3. STILLMAN AE, WILKE N, JEROSCH-HEROLD M: Myocardial viability. Radiol Clin North Am 1999; 37(2): 361-78.

  4. WIJNS W, VATNER S, CAMICI P: Hibernating myocardium. N Engl J Med 1998; 339(3): 173-81.

  5. MADDAHI J: The use of positron emission tomography in management of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Adv Card Surg 1996; 7: 163-88.

  6. PERRONE-FILARDI P, CHIARIELLO M: The Identification of myocardial hibernation in patients with ischemic heart failure by echocardiography and radionucleide studies. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2001; 43(5): 419-32.

  7. ORDOUBADI F, BEATT KJ, SPYROU N: Efficacy of coronary angioplasty for the treatment of hibernating myocardium. Heart 1999; 82: 212-16.

  8. ALEXÁNDERSON E, VARGUEZ V, BIALOSTOZKY D, ARROYO A, ALEXÁNDERSON G, VICTORIA D: Valoración simultánea de la perfusión y la viabilidad miocárdica a través del estudio de dos isótopos (Talio reposo/MIBI esfuerzo). Experiencia inicial en México y América Latina. Arch Inst Cardiol Mex 1997; 67: 106-13.

  9. DILSIZIAN V, ROCCO TP, FREEDMAN NM, LEON MB, BONOW RO: Enhanced detection of ischemic but viable myocardium by the reinjection of thallium after stress-redistribution imaging. N Engl J Med 1990; 323(3): 141-6.

  10. DUTKA DP, CAMICI PG: The contribution of positron emission tomography to the study of ischemic heart failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 2001; 43(5): 399-418.

  11. BAX JJ, WIJNS W, CORNEL JH, VISSER FC, BOERSMA E, FIORETTI PM: Accuracy of currently available techniques for prediction of functional recovery after revascularization in patients with left ventricular dysfunction due to chronic coronary artery disease: comparison of pooled data. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 30: 1451-60.

  12. DILSIZIAN V, PERRONE-FILARDI P, ARRIGHI JA, BACHARACH SL, QUYYUMI AA, FREEDMAN NM, ET AL: Concordance and discordance between stress-redistribution-reinjection and rest-redistribution thallium imaging for assessing viable myocardium. Comparison with metabolic activity by positron emission tomography. Circulation 1993; 88(3): 941-52.

  13. MARIN-NETO JA, DILSIZIAN V, ARRIGHI JA, PERRONE-FILARDI P, BACHARACH SL, BONOW RO: Thallium scintigraphy compared with 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for assessing myocardial viability in patients with moderate versus severe left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol 1998; 82: 1001-7.

  14. EITZMAN D, AL-AOUAR ZR, KANTER HL: Clinical outcome of patients with advanced coronary artery disease after viability studies with positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992; 20: 559-65.

  15. BRUNKEN RC, MODY FV, HAWKINS RA, NIENABER C, PHELPS ME, SCHELBERT HR: Positron emission tomography detects metabolic viability in myocardium with persistent 24-hour single-photon emission tomography 201Tl defects. Circulation 1992; 86(5): 1357-69.

  16. PAGANO D, BONSER RS, TOWNEND JN, ORDOUBADI F, LORENZONI R, CAMICI PG: Predictive value of dobutamine echocardiography and positron emission tomography in identifying hibernating myocardium in patients with postischaemic heart failure. Heart 1998; 79: 281-8.

  17. KUHL HP, BEEK AM, VAN DER WEERDT AP, HOFMAN MB, VISSER CA, LAMMERTSMA AA, ET AL: Myocardial viability in chronic ischemic heart disease: comparison of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41(8): 1341-8.

  18. ADAM L, ZAERS J: Performance evaluation of the whole-body PET scanner. Proc IEEE 1997; 2: 1270-4.

  19. CERQUEIRA M, WEISSMAN N, DILSIZIAN V, JACOBS A, KAUL S, LASKEY W, ET AL: Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation 2002; 105: 539-42.

  20. MADDAHI J, SHELBERT H, BRUNKEN R, DI CARLI MF: Role of thallium-201 and PET imaging in evaluation of myocardial viability and management of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Journal of Nuclear Medicine 1994; 35(4): 707-15.

  21. DI CARLI MF, DAVIDSON M, LITTLE R, KHANNA S, MODY FV, BRUNKEN RC, ET AL: Value of metabolic imaging with positron emission tomography for evaluating prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. American Journal of Cardiology 1994; 73(8): 527-33.

  22. BONOW RO, DILSIZIAN V, CUOCOLO A, BACHARACH SL: Identification of viable myocardium in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Comparison of thallium scintigraphy with reinjection and PET imaging with 18-F-fluorodeoxyglucose. Circulation 1991; 83(1): 26-37.

  23. BURT RW, PERKINS OW, OPPENHEIM BE, SCHAUWECKER DS, STEIN L, WELLMAN HN: Direct comparison of fluorine-18-FDG SPECT, fluorine-18- FDG PET and rest thallium-201 SPECT for detection of myocardial viability. J Nucl Med 1995; 36(2): 176-9.

  24. MARINHO NVS, KEOGH BE, COSTA DC, LAMMERSTMA AA, ELL PJ, CAMICI PG: Pathophysiology of chronic left ventricular dysfunction. New insights from the measurement of absolute myocardial blood flow and glucose utilization. Circulation 1996; 93: 737-44.

  25. KNUTTI MJ, NUUTILA P, RUOTSALAINEN U: Euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp and oral glucose load in simulating myocardial glucose utilization during positron emission tomography. J Nucl Med 1992; 33: 1255-62.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com