+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparison of multislice computed tomography to gated single-photon emission computed tomography for imaging of healed myocardial infarcts



Comparison of multislice computed tomography to gated single-photon emission computed tomography for imaging of healed myocardial infarcts



American Journal of Cardiology 101(2): 144-148



The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) for the detection and semiquantitative analysis of healed myocardial infarct in comparison to single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Recently, MSCT was shown to allow detection of myocardial infarct by the presence of hypoenhanced areas. However, direct comparisons to other imaging modalities for infarct imaging were scarce. In 69 patients with healed myocardial infarct (>3 months), the presence of myocardial infarct and infarct score was assessed using SPECT and MSCT. In addition, regional and global left ventricular function was assessed using MSCT. In 62 of 69 patients (90%), a perfusion defect was detected using gated SPECT at rest. Using MSCT in these 62 patients (100%), hypoenhanced areas reflecting infarct were shown. In 3 of 7 patients (43%) without perfusion defects who underwent gated SPECT, MSCT identified regions of infarct. The infarct score on MSCT related well to the SPECT infarct score (12 +/- 10% vs 16 +/- 13%; r = 0.93, p <0.0001). In addition, good (inverse) correlations were shown for infarct score using MSCT and parameters of left ventricular function. In conclusion, healed myocardial infarct can be detected accurately using MSCT, with good correlation with SPECT.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 020756015

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 18178396

DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.07.084


Related references

Images in cardiovascular medicine. Hybrid cardiac single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography imaging with myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography and multidetector computed tomography coronary angiography for the assessment of unstable angina pectoris after coronary artery bypass grafting. Circulation 114(6): E237-E239, 2006

Assessment of myocardial perfusion pattern using electrocardiogram-gated multislice computed tomography after acute myocardial infarction A comparative study with rest electrocardiogram-gated single-photon emission computed tomography. European Heart Journal 24(Abstract Supplement): 440, August-September, 2003

Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 53(7): 623-632, 2009

Assessment of left ventricular function by electrocardiogram-gated myocardial single photon emission computed tomography using quantitative gated single photon emission computed tomography software. Journal of Cardiology 33(5): 257-263, 1999

Is computed tomography attenuation correction more efficient than gated single photon emission computed tomography analysis in improving the diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with low prevalence of ischemic heart disease?. Nuclear Medicine Communications 36(1): 69-77, 2015

Gated single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging is superior to computed tomography attenuation correction in discriminating myocardial infarction from attenuation artifacts in men and right coronary artery disease. Nuclear Medicine Communications 2019, 2019

Comparison of single photon emission computed tomography-computed tomography, computed tomography, single photon emission computed tomography and planar scintigraphy for characterization of isolated skull lesions seen on bone scintigraphy in cancer patients. Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine 29(1): 22-29, 2014

Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography coronary angiography and evaluation of stress-only single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography hybrid imaging: comparison of prospective electrocardiogram-triggering vs. retrospective gating. European Heart Journal 30(5): 600-607, 2009

Left ventricular muscle mass by single photon emission computed tomography sestamibi imaging in patients with myocardial infarction A comparison to electron beam computed tomography. Circulation 100(18 SUPPL ): I 662, Nov 2, 1999

Differentiation of myocardial ischemia and infarction assessed by dynamic computed tomography perfusion imaging and comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance and single-photon emission computed tomography. European Radiology 26(11): 3790-3801, 2016

Tc-99m Glucoheptonate Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography-Computed Tomography for Detection of Recurrent Glioma: A Prospective Comparison with N-13 Ammonia Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography. Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine 34(2): 107-117, 2019

Left ventricular functional analysis with 16- and 64-row multidetector computed tomography: comparison with gated single-photon emission computed tomography. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography 33(1): 8-14, 2009

Aortic root abscess: multimodality imaging with computed tomography and gallium-67 citrate single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography hybrid imaging. Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography 5(2): 122-124, 2011

Clinical usefulness of thallium 201 myocardial single photon emission computed tomography in cases of acute myocardial infarction with special regard to visual diagnosis of myocardial single photon emission computed tomography. Journal of Nippon Medical School 53(4): 345-355, 1986

Comparison of 180° and 360° Arc Data Acquisition to Measure Scintigraphic Parameters from Gated Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: Is There Any Difference?. Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy 25(1): 26-31, 2016