CCS/CAR/CANM/CNCS/CanSCMR joint position statement on advanced noninvasive cardiac imaging using positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and multidetector computed tomographic angiography in the diagnosis and evaluation of ischemic heart disease - Executive summary

Canadian Journal of Cardiology

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 107-119

  Beanlands, Rob S B ^a   Chow, Benjamin J W ^a   Dick, Alexander ^b   Friedrich, Matthias G ^c   Gulenchyn, Karen Y ^d   Kiess, Maria ^e   Leong Poi, Howard ^f   Miller, Robert M ^g   Nichol, Graham ^h   Freeman, Michael ^f   Bogaty, Peter ⁱ   Honos, George ^j   Hudon, Gilles ^k   Wisenberg, Gerald ^l   Van Berkom, Judith ^m   Williams, Kathryn ^a   Yoshinaga, Keiichiro ^a   Graham, John ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA HEART INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^d MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^f ST MICHAEL'S HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^g DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^h UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

ⁱ LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^j MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^k UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^l UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

^m CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF EASTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

more..

Author keywords

Computed tomographic angiography; Coronary artery disease detection and prognosis; Magnetic resonance imaging; Positron emission tomography; Viability detection and prognosis

Indexed keywords

ADENOSINE; AMMONIA; ATROPINE; DIPYRIDAMOLE; DOBUTAMINE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GADOLINIUM; NICORANDIL; NITROGEN 13; OXYGEN 15; RUBIDIUM 82; TECHNETIUM 99M; THALLIUM 201;

ARTICLE; CANADA; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANGIOGRAPHY; CONSENSUS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE FUNCTION; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; ISCHEMIC HEART DISEASE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NON INVASIVE MEASUREMENT; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROGNOSIS; REVASCULARIZATION; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; ANGIOCARDIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; HEART MUSCLE ISCHEMIA;

CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MYOCARDIAL ISCHEMIA; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 34047093886     PISSN: 0828282X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0828-282X(07)70730-4     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, et al; American College of Cardiology; American Heart Association; American Society for Nuclear Cardiology. ACC/ AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging - executive summary: A report of the American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging). J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;42:1318-33.
2. Schelbert HR, Beanlands R, Bengel F, et al.. PET myocardial perfusion and glucose metabolism imaging: Part 2-Guidelines for interpretation and reporting. J Nucl Cardiol 2003;10:557-71.
3. Pennell DJ, Sechtem UP, Higgins CB, et al.; Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance; Working Group on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance of the European Society of Cardiology. Clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR): Consensus Panel report. Eur Heart J 2004;25:1940-65.
4. Bateman TM, Heller GV, McGhie AI, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of rest/ stress ECG-gated Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET: Comparison with ECG-gated Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:24-33.
5. Di Carli MF, Hachamovitch R. Should PET replace SPECT for evaluating CAD? The end of the beginning. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:2-7.
6. Marwick TH, Shan K, Patel S, Go RT, Lauer MS. Incremental value of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography for prognostic assessment of known or suspected coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 1997;80:865-70.
7. Yoshinaga K, Chow BJ, Williams K, et al. What is the prognostic value with rubidium-82 perfusion positron emission tomography imaging? J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:1029-39.
8. 82Rb PET myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med 2005; 46:1095-101.
9. Bax JJ, Poldermans D, Elhendy A, Boersma E, Rahimtoola SH. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive accuracies of various noninvasive techniques for detecting hibernating myocardium. Curr Probl Cardiol 2001;26:147-86.
10. Tarakji KG, Brunken R, McCarthy PM, et al. Myocardial viability testing and the effect of early intervention in patients with advanced left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Circulation 2006;113:230-7.
11. 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;39:1151-8.
12. 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1166-73.
13. Desideri A, Cortigiani L, Christen AI, et al.. The extent of perfusion-F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography mismatch determines mortality in medically treated patients with chronic ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1264-9.
14. Siebelink HM, Blanksma PK, Crijns HJ, et al. No difference in cardiac event-free survival between positron emission tomography-guided and single-photon emission computed tomography-guided patient management: A prospective, randomized comparison of patients with suspicion of jeopardized myocardium. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:81-8.
15. Chow BJ, Hoffman U, Nieman K. Computed tomographic coronary angiography: An alternative to invasive coronary angiography. Can J Cardiol 2005;21:933-40.
16. Schlosser T, Konorza T, Hunold P, Kuhl H, Schmermund A, Barkhausen J. Noninvasive visualization of coronary artery bypass grafts using 16-detector row computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1224-9.
17. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Jukema JW, et al. Feasibility of assessment of coronary stent patency using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2004;94:427-30.
18. Shi H, Aschoff AJ, Brambs HJ, Hoffmarm MH. Multislice CT imaging of anomalous coronary arteries. Eur Radiol 2004;14:2172-81.
19. Schmitt R, Froehner S, Brunn J, et al.. Congenital anomalies of the coronary arteries: Imaging with contrast-enhanced, multidetector computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1110-21.
20. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Shaw LJ, et al. Meta-analysis of comparative diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging and multislice computed tomography for noninvasive coronary angiography. Am Heart J 2006; 151:404-11.
21. Thompson RC, Cullom SJ. Issues regarding radiation dosage of cardiac nuclear and radiography procedures. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:19-23.
22. Kefer J, Coche E, Legros G, et al. Head-to-head comparison of three-dimensional navigator-gated magnetic resonance imaging and 16-slice computed tomography to detect coronary artery stenosis in patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:92-100.
23. Mollet NR, Cademartiri F, van Mieghem CA, et al.. High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography. Circulation 2005; 112:2318-23.
24. Kim WY, Danias PG, Stuber M, et al. Coronary magnetic resonance angiography for the detection of coronary stenoses. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1863-9.
25. Danias PG, Roussakis A, Ioannidis JP. Diagnostic performance of coronary magnetic resonance angiography as compared against conventional x-ray angiography: A meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1867-76.
26. Sommer T, Hackenbroch M, Hofer U, et al. Coronary MR angiography at 3.0 T versus that at 1.5 T: Intitial results in patients suspected of having coronary artery disease. Radiology. 2005;234:718-25.
27. Nagel E, Lehmkuhl HB, Bocksch W, et al. Noninvasive diagnosis of ischemia-induced wall motion abnormalities with the use of high-dose dobutamine stress MRI: Comparison with dobutamine stress echocardiography. Circulation 1999;99:763-70.
28. Kim R, Wu E, Rafael A, et al. The use of contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to identify reversible myocardial dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2000;343:1445-53.
29. Klein C, Nekolla SG, Bengel FM, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison with positron emission tomography. Circulation 2002;105:162-7.
30. Selvanayagam JB, Kardos A, Francis J, et al.. Value of delayed-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in predicting myocardial viability after surgical revascularization. Circulation 2004;110:1535-41.
31. Coles DR, Smail MA, Negus IS, et al. Comparison of radiation doses from multislice computed tomography coronary angiography and conventional diagnostic angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1840-5.
32. International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 53: Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals. Annals of the IRCP 1998;18:1-4.
33. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Shaw LJ, et al. Meta-analysis of comparative diagnostic performance of magnetic resonance imaging and multislice computed tomography for noninvasive coronary angiography. Am Heart J 2006;151:404-11.