PDF herunterladen
Nuklearmedizin 2017; 56(04): 115-123
DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-2017040001
S1-Leitlinie
Schattauer GmbH

Myokard-Perfusions-SPECT

Update S1-Leitlinie[1] Myocardial perfusion SPECTUpdate S1 guideline
Oliver Lindner
1   Institut für Radiologie, Nuklearmedizin und Molekulare Bildgebung, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen
,
Frank Bengel
2   Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover
,
Wolfgang Burchert
1   Institut für Radiologie, Nuklearmedizin und Molekulare Bildgebung, Herz- und Diabeteszentrum NRW, Bad Oeynhausen
,
Rolf Dörr
3   Praxisklinik Herz und Gefäße, Dresden
,
Marcus Hacker
4   Universitätsklinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Medizinische Universität Wien
,
Wolfgang Schäfer
5   Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH, Mönchengladbach
,
Michael A. Schäfers
6   Klinik für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Münster
,
Matthias Schmidt
7   Klinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Köln
,
Markus Schwaiger
8   Nuklearmedizinische Klinik, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München
,
Jürgen vom Dahl
9   Klinik für Kardiologie, Kliniken Maria Hilf GmbH, Mönchengladbach
,
Rainer Zimmermann
10   Medizinische Klinik, Klinikum Pforzheim GmbH, Pforzheim
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

received: 16. Mai 2017

accepted: 16. Mai 2017

Publikationsdatum:
04. Januar 2018 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die S1-Leitlinie Myokard-Perfusions-SPECT wurde überarbeitet und bei der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der wissenschaftlichen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF) online publiziert. Sie ist in ihrer aktuellen Fassung bis 2/2022 gültig. Dieser Beitrag gibt in gekürzter Form und mit Kommentaren versehen die Kapitel und Unterkapitel wieder, in denen Änderungen und Ergänzungen vorgenommen wurden.

Summary

The S1 guideline for myocardial perfusion SPECT has been published by the Association of the Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF) and is valid until 2/2022. This paper is a short summary with comments on all chapters and subchapters wich were modified and amended.

Schlüsselwörter

Leitlinie - Myokardszintigraphie - SPECT - KHK

Keywords

German guidelines - myocardial scintigraphy - SPECT - coronary artery disease

1 Die überarbeitete und aktualisierte Fassung der S1-Leitlinie Myokard-Perfusions-SPECT (Registrierungsnummer 031–006) wurde am 25.04.2017 bei der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der wissenschaftlichen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF, www.awmf.org) online gestellt und ist bis Februar 2022 gültig.


 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Al Jaroudi W, Iskandrian AE. Regadenoson: a new myocardial stress agent. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 1123-1130.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Allman KC, Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Udelson JE. Myocardial viability testing and impact of revascularization on prognosis in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 39: 1151-1158.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bateman TM, Heller GV, Johnson LL. et al. Does attenuation correction add value to non-attenuation corrected ECG-gated technetium-99m-sestamibi SPECT?. Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2003; 10: S91.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Bax JJ, Delgado V. Myocardial viability as integral part of the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to ischemic heart failure. J Nucl Cardiol 2015; 22: 229-245.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Berman DS, Abidov A, Kang X. et al. Prognostic validation of a 17-segment score derived from a 20-segment score for myocardial perfusion SPECT interpretation. J Nucl Cardiol 2004; 11: 414-423.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bonow RO, Maurer G, Lee KL. et al. Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 1617-1625.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Brinkert M, Reyes E, Walker S. et al. Regadenoson in Europe: first-year experience of regadenoson stress combined with submaximal exercise in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41: 511-521.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. Bekanntmachung der aktualisierten diagnostischen Referenzwerte für nuklearmedizinische Untersuchungen Vom 25. September 2012. Veröffentlicht am Freitag, 19. Oktober 2012 BAnz AT 19.10.2012 B5.
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. Bekanntmachung der diagnostischen Referenzwerte für radiologische und nuklearmedizinische Untersuchungen. BAnz Nr. 143 vom 05.08.2003.
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Bundesärztekammer, Arbeitsgemeinschaft der wissenschaftlichen medizinischen Fachgesellschaften, Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung. Nationale Versorgungs-Leitlinie Chronische KHK (Langfassung). 4. Auflage 2016 AWMF-Register-Nr.: NVL-004.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Chen L, Wang X, Bao J. et al. Direct comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance and singlephoton emission computed tomography for detection of coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2014; 9: e88402.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 de Jong MC, Genders TS, van Geuns RJ, Moelker A, Hunink MG. Diagnostic performance of stress myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 1881-1895.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Genders TS, Steyerberg EW, Alkadhi H. et al. A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: validation, updating, and extension. Eur Heart J 2011; 32: 1316-1330.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Shaw LJ. et al. Incremental prognostic value of myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography for the prediction of cardiac death: differential stratification for risk of cardiac death and myocardial infarction. Circulation 1998; 97: 535-543.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 2003; 107: 2900-2907.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Hayes SW. et al. Predicting therapeutic benefit from myocardial revascularization procedures: are measurements of both resting left ventricular ejection fraction and stress-induced myocardial ischemia necessary?. J Nucl Cardiol 2006; 13: 768-778.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Hendel RC, Corbett JR, Cullom SJ. et al. The value and practice of attenuation correction for myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging: a joint position statement from the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology and the Society of Nuclear Medicine. J Nucl Cardiol 2002; 9: 135-143.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hoffmeister C, Preuss R, Weise R. et al. The effect of beta blocker withdrawal on adenosine myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2014; 21: 1223-1229.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Holly TA, Abbott BG, Al-Mallah M. et al. Single photon-emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol 2010; 17: 941-973.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 ICRP Publication 80. Radiological protection in biomedical research.: Annals of the ICRP Vol 28/3. Pergamon Press; 1998
  • 21 Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Belardinelli L. et al. Adenosine versus regadenoson comparative evaluation in myocardial perfusion imaging: results of the ADVANCE phase 3 multicenter international trial. J Nucl Cardiol 2007; 14: 645-658.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Jaarsma C, Leiner T, Bekkers SC. et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission computed tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and positron emission tomography imaging for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59: 1719-1728.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kajander S, Joutsiniemi E, Saraste M. et al. Cardiac positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging accurately detects anatomically and functionally significant coronary artery disease. Circulation 2010; 122: 603-613.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Knuuti J, Bengel F, Bax JJ. et al. Risks and benefits of cardiac imaging: an analysis of risks related to imaging for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J 2014; 35: 633-638.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Mc Ardle BA, Dowsley TF, deKemp RA, Wells GA, Beanlands RS. Does rubidium-82 PET have superior accuracy to SPECT perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary disease?: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 60: 1828-1837.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 McMurray JJ, Adamopoulos S, Anker SD. et al. ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2012: The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute and Chronic Heart Failure 2012 of the European Society of Cardiology.Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC. Eur J Heart Fail 2012; 14: 803-869.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S. et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 2949-3003.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Notghi A, Williams N, Smith N, Goyle S, Harding LK. Relationship between myocardial counts and patient weight: adjusting the injected activity in myocardial perfusion scans. Nucl Med Commun 2003; 24: 55-59.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Parker MW, Iskandar A, Limone B. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac positron emission tomography versus single photon emission computed tomography for coronary artery disease: a bivariate meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012; 5: 700-707.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Reyes E, Stirrup J, Roughton M. et al. Attenuation of adenosine-induced myocardial perfusion heterogeneity by atenolol and other cardioselective beta-adrenoceptor blockers: a crossover myocardial perfusion imaging study. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1036-1043.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Salgado Garcia C, Jimenez Heffernan A, Sanchez de Mora E. et al. Comparative study of the safety of regadenoson between patients with mild/moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2013; 41: 119-125.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Schinkel AF, Bax JJ, Poldermans D. et al. Hibernating myocardium: diagnosis and patient outcomes. Curr Probl Cardiol 2007; 32: 375-410.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Sharir T, Bacher-Stier C, Dhar S. et al. Identification of severe and extensive coronary artery disease by postexercise regional wall motion abnormalities in Tc-99m sestamibi gated single-photon emission computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2000; 86: 1171-1175.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Sharir T, Germano G, Kang X. et al. Prediction of myocardial infarction versus cardiac death by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: risk stratification by the amount of stress-induced ischemia and the poststress ejection fraction. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 831-837.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE. Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2004; 11: 171-185.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Taillefer R, DePuey EG, Udelson JE. et al. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of Tl-201 and Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT imaging (perfusion and ECG-gated SPECT) in detecting coronary artery disease in women. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 29: 69-77.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Takx RA, Blomberg BA, El Aidi H. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of stress myocardial perfusion imaging compared to invasive coronary angiography with fractional flow reserve meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2015; 8 (01) e002666.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Taylor JC, Froberg SA, Hillel PG, Harris AM, Tindale WB. Correlation of left ventricular count rate with patient weight in Tc-99m myocardial perfusion imaging. Nucl Med Commun 2011; 32 (04) 279-283.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Thomas GS, Tammelin BR, Schiffman GL. et al. Safety of regadenoson, a selective adenosine A2A agonist, in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (RegCOPD trial). J Nucl Cardiol 2008; 15: 319-328.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Thomas GS, Thompson RC, Miyamoto MI. et al. The RegEx trial: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-and active-controlled pilot study combining regadenoson, a selective A(2A) adenosine agonist, with low-level exercise, in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2009; 16: 63-72.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Yoon AJ, Melduni RM, Duncan SA, Ostfeld RJ, Travin MI. The effect of beta-blockers on the diagnostic accuracy of vasodilator pharmacologic SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2009; 16: 358-367.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Zhou T, Yang LF, Zhai JL. et al. SPECT myocardial perfusion versus fractional flow reserve for evaluation of functional ischemia: a meta analysis. Eur J Radiol 2014; 83: 951-956.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Zoghbi GJ, Dorfman TA, Iskandrian AE. The effects of medications on myocardial perfusion. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 52: 401-416.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar