4.2 Article

Technetium pyrophosphate uptake in transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis: Associations with echocardiographic disease severity and outcomes

Journal

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 4, Pages 1247-1256

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12350-016-0768-9

Keywords

Transthyretin amyloidosis; Technetium pyrophosphate; ATTR; TcPYP; Mortality; Echocardiography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. Quantitative uptake of Technetium 99 m-pyrophosphate (TcPYP) is sensitive and specific for diagnosing transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR). We sought to examine the association between TcPYP uptake intensity and echocardiographic measures of disease severity and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results. A retrospective analysis was performed of 75 patients who underwent TcPYP scintigraphy. Planar images were evaluated semiquantitatively and using heart-tocontralateral lung (H/CL) ratio. The associations between H/CL ratio and echocardiographic parameters and outcomes were evaluated using linear regression and Cox models, respectively. There were 48 patients diagnosed with ATTR with mean H/CL ratio 1.58 +/- 0.22 (vs 1.08 +/- 0.09 if semiquantitative score = 0). The H/CL ratio was not associated with any measured echocardiographic parameter. Both semiquantitative uptake grade and H/CL ratio were associated with all-cause mortality (P = 0.009 and 0.007, respectively) and all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization (P = 0.001 and 0.020, respectively); however, neither were associated with outcomes when limited to patients with confirmed ATTR (P = 0.18 and 0.465, respectively). Conclusion. In patients with suspected ATTR, quantitative and semiquantitative uptake intensity of TcPYP is associated with all-cause mortality as well as all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization. However, in those with confirmed ATTR, there is no association with echocardiographic disease severity or outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available