Tolerance of MRI vs. SPECT Myocardial Perfusion Studies - A Patient Survey

Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 410-416

  Sparrow, Patrick ^a   Plein, Sven ^a   Jones, Tim R ^a   Thorley, Penelope J ^a   Hale, Claire ^b   Sivananthan, Mohan U ^a  

^a LEEDS GENERAL INFIRMARY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Magnetic resonance imaging; Myocardial perfusion imaging; Patient tolerance; Questionnaire; Single photon emission tomography

Indexed keywords

AGED; APPARATUS; CHI SQUARE TEST; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HEART MUSCLE PERFUSION; HUMAN; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SAFETY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; UNITED KINGDOM; WILCOXON SIGNED RANKS TEST;

AGED; ANXIETY; CORONARY CIRCULATION; CORONARY DISEASE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUESTIONNAIRES; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED, SINGLE-PHOTON;

EID: 1842537982     PISSN: 10531807     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20030     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. 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.
2. Tamaki M, Takahashi N, Kawamoto M, et al. Myocardial tomography using technetium-99m-tetrofosmin to evaluate coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med 1994;35:594-600.
3. Zaret BL, Rigo P, Wackers FJ, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging with 99mTc tetrofosmin. Comparison to 201Tl imaging and coronary angiography in a phase III multicentre trial. Circulation 1995; 91:313-319.
4. Manning WJ, Atkinson DJ, Grossmann W, Paulin S, Edelman RR. First-pass nuclear magnetic resonance imaging studies using gadolinium-DTPA in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;18:959-965.
5. Wilke N, Jerosch-Herold M, Zenovich A, Stillman AE. Magnetic resonance first pass myocardial perfusion imaging: clinical validation and future applications. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;10:676-685.
6. Al-Saadi N, Nagel E, Gross M, et al. Noninvasive detection of myocardial ischemia from perfusion reserve based on cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Circulation 2000;101:1379-1383.
7. Schwitter J, Nanz D, Kneifel S, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion in coronary artery disease by magnetic resonance. A comparison with positron emission tomography and coronary angiography. Circulation 2001;103:2230-2235.
8. Keijer JT, Van Rossum AC, Van Eenige MJ, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of regional myocardial perfusion in patients with single vessel coronary artery disease: quantitative comparison with 201 Thallium-SPECT and coronary arteriography. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000;11:607-615.
9. Wagner A, Mahrholdt H, Holly TA, et al. Contrast enhanced MRI and routine single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) perfusion imaging for detection of subendocardial myocardial infarcts: an imaging study. Lancet 2003;361:374-379.
10. Plein S, Ridgway JP, Jones TR, Bloomer TN, Sivananthan UM. A comprehensive magnetic resonance imaging protocol for the assessment of coronary artery disease - initial results. Radiology 2002;225:300-307.
11. Mansoor MR, Heller GV. Gated SPECT imaging. Semin Nucl Med 1999;24:271-278.
12. Germano G, Berman DS. On the accuracy and reproducibility of quantitative gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med 1999; 40:810-813.
13. Melendez J, McCrank E. Anxiety related reactions with magnetic resonance imaging examinations. JAMA 1993;270:745-748.
14. Flahartey J, Hoskinson K. Emotional distress during magnetic resonance imaging. N Engl J Med 1989;320:467-468.
15. Isaac HM. Claustrophobia and the magnetic resonance imaging procedure. J Behav Med 1998;21:255-268.
16. Thorp D, Owens RG, Whitehouse G, Dewey ME. Subjective experiences of magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1990;41:276-278.
17. Mackenzie R, Sims C, Owens RG, Dixon AK. Patient's perceptions of magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1995;50:137-143.
18. Slifer K, Penn-Jones K, Cataldo MF, Connor RT, Zerhouni EA. Music enhances patients' comfort during MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991;156:403.
19. Hricak H, Amporo EG. Alleviation of claustrophobia by placement in the prone position [technical note]. Radiology 1984;152:819.
20. Taylor AM, Jhooti P, Wiesmann F, Keegan J, Firmin DN, Pennell D. Magnetic resonance navigator-echo monitoring of temporal changes in diaphragm position: implications for magnetic resonance coronary angiography. J Magn Reson Imaging 1997;7:629-636.
21. Meester GD, Morich M, Byrne A, Davies F, Melotte D, Thomas A. Challenges of short magnet design. MAGMA 2002;13:193-198.
22. Ravizzini G, Hanson MW, Shaw LK, et al. Efficiency comparison between 99m Tc-tetrofosmin and 99m Tc-sestamibi myocardial perfusion studies. Nucl Med Commun 2002;23:203-208.
23. Jain D, Wackers FW, Matera J, McMahon M, Sinusas AJ, Zaret BL. Biokinetics of technetium-99-m-tetrofosmin: myocardial perfusion imaging agent: implications for a one day imaging protocol. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1254-1259.
24. Parker J. Effect of motion on cardiac SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med 1993;34:1355-1356.
25. Louis TA, Lavori PW, Bailar JC, Polansky M. Crossover and self controlled designs in clinical research. N Engl J Med 1984;310:24-31.