4.2 Article

Clinical value of attenuation correction in stress-only Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 273-281

出版社

MOSBY, INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclcard.2004.03.005

关键词

myocardial perfusion imaging; attenuation correction; single photon emission computed tomography; electrocardiography gating

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Attenuation artifact remains a substantial limitation to confident interpretation of images and reduces laboratory efficiency by requiring comparison of stress and rest image sets. Attenuation-corrected stress-only imaging has the potential to ameliorate these limitations. Methods and Results. Ten experienced nuclear cardiologists independently interpreted 90 stress-only electrocardiography (ECG)-gated technetium 99m sestamibi images in a sequential fashion: myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) alone, MPI plus ECG-gated data, and attenuation-corrected MPI with ECG-gated data. Images were interpreted for diagnostic certainty (normal, probably normal, equivocal, probably abnormal, abnormal, and perceived need for rest imaging). With stress MPI data alone, only 37% of studies were interpreted as definitely normal or abnormal, with a very high perceived need for rest imaging (77%). The addition of gated data did not alter the interpretations. However, attenuation-corrected data significantly increased the number of studies characterized as definitely normal or abnormal (84%, P < .005) and significantly reduced the perceived need for rest imaging (43%, P < .005). These results were confirmed by use of a nonsequential consensus interpretation of three readers. Conclusion. Attenuation correction applied to studies with stress-only Tc-99m ECG-gated single photon emission computed tomography images significantly increases the ability to interpret studies as definitely normal or abnormal and reduces the need for rest imaging. These findings may improve laboratory efficiency and diagnostic accuracy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据