SNMMI/ASNC/SCCT guideline for cardiac SPECT/CT and PET/CT 1.0

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 54, Issue 8, 2013, Pages 1485-1507

  Dorbala, Sharmila ^a   Di Carli, Marcelo F ^a   Delbeke, Dominique ^b   Abbara, Suhny ^c   De Puey, E Gordon ^d   Dilsizian, Vasken ^e   Forrester, Joey ^b   Janowitz, Warren ^f   Kaufmann, Philipp A ^g   Mahmarian, John ^h   Moore, Stephen C ^a   Stabin, Michael G ^b   Shreve, Paul ⁱ  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d ST LUKE S ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f BAPTIST HOSPITAL OF MIAMI   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^h HOUSTON METHODIST HOSPITAL   (United States)

ⁱ Advanced Radiology Services   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMMONIA N 13; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M; RUBIDIUM 82; TECHNETIUM 99M; TETROFOSMIN TC 99M; THALLIUM 201;

ARTICLE; BLOOD GLUCOSE MONITORING; CARDIAC IMAGING; CERTIFICATION; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY; CORONARY ARTERY CALCIUM SCORE; DATA ANALYSIS SOFTWARE; DOSIMETRY; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG UPTAKE; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EXERCISE TEST; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGING SYSTEM; ISOTOPE LABELING; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNICIAN; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT SAFETY; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PHYSICIST; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREMEDICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; RADIATION SAFETY; SCINTISCANNING; SCREENING TEST; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; SPECT SCANNER; TREATMENT INDICATION;

DOCUMENTATION; FEMALE; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEART; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; INFECTION CONTROL; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSICIANS; PHYSICS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PREGNANCY; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SAFETY; SOCIETIES, SCIENTIFIC;

EID: 84881457446     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.105155     Document Type: Article

References (152)

1. Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, et al. 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;42:1318-1333.
2. Procedure guideline for myocardial perfusion imaging 3.3. Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Web site. Available at: http://interactive.snmmi.org/docs/155.pdf. Published September 2008. Accessed March 1, 2012.
3. Practice Guideline for the Performance of Cardiac Scintigraphy. American College of Radiology Web site. Available at: http://www.acr.org/Secondary MainMenuCategories/quality-safety/guidelines/nuc-med/cardiac-scintigraphy. aspx. Published 2009. Accessed March 1, 2012
4. Hendel RC, Berman DS, Di Carli MF, et al. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/ SCCT/SCMR/SNMMI 2009 Appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging-endorsed by the American College of Emergency Physicians. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:2201-2229.
5. Holly TA, Abbott BG, Al-Mallah M, et al. Single photon-emission computed tomography. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Web site. Available at: http://www.asnc.org/imageuploads/ImagingGuidelineSPECTJune2010.pdf. Published June 15, 2010. Accessed March 1, 2012.
6. Dilsizian V, Bacharach SL, Beanlands RS, et al. PET myocardial perfusion and metabolism clinical imaging. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Web site. Available at: http://www.asnc.org/imageuploads/ ImagingGuidelinesPETJuly2009. pdf. Published 2008. Accessed March 12, 2012.
7. Di Carli MF. Hybrid imaging: integration of nuclear imaging and cardiac CT. Cardiol Clin. 2009;27:257-263.
8. Bengel FM, Higuchi T, Javadi MS, Lautamaki R. Cardiac positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1-15.
9. Buck AK, Nekolla S, Ziegler S, et al. SPECT/CT. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1305-1319.
10. 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.
11. Flotats A, Knuuti J, Gutberlet M, et al. Hybrid cardiac imaging: SPECT/CT and PET/CT-a joint position statement by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), the European Society of Cardiac Radiology (ESCR) and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology (ECNC). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:201-212.
12. Taylor AJ, Cerqueira M, Hodgson JM, et al. ACCF/SCCT/ACR/AHA/ASE/ ASNC/NASCI/SCAI/SCMR 2010 appropriate use criteria for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, the American College of Radiology, the American Heart Association, the American Society of Echocardiography, the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the North American Society for Cardiovascular Imaging, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1864-1894.
13. ACR practice guideline for the performance and interpretation of cardiac computed tomography. American College of Radiology Web site. Available at: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality-safety/guidelines/dx/ cardio/ct-cardiac.aspx. Published 2011. Accessed March 1, 2012.
14. Conjoint statement of the SNMMI and the ACNP on credentialing and delineation of privileges for cardiac PET. J Nucl Med. 2007;5:850-851.
15. Rodgers GP, Ayanian JZ, Balady G, et al. American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association clinical competence statement on stress testing: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/ American College of Physicians-American Society of Internal Medicine Task Force on Clinical Competence. Circulation. 2000;102:1726-1738.
16. The SNMMI procedure guideline for general imaging 6.0. Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Web site. Available at: http://interactive. snmmi.org/index.cfm?pageID=772. Published 2010. Accessed March 13, 2012.
17. Cerqueira MD, Berman DS, Di Carli MF, Schelbert HR, Wackers FJ, Williams KA. Task force 5: training in nuclear cardiology endorsed by the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:368-374.
18. ACR/SNMMI technical standard for diagnostic procedures using radiopharmaceuticals. American College of Radiology Web site. Available at: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality-safety/guidelines/ nuc-med/radiopharmaceuticals.aspx. Published 2011. Accessed March 1, 2012.
19. ACGME program requirements for graduate medical education in nuclear medicine. Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Web site. Available at: http://www.acgme.org/acWebsite/downloads/RRC-progReq/200-nuclear- medicine-07012007.pdf. Published July 1, 2007. Accessed November 19, 2010, 2010.
20. Conjoint statement of the SNMMI and the ACNP on credentialing and delineation of privileges for cardiovascular CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;5:852-853.
21. Budoff MJ, Achenbach S, Berman DS, et al. Task force 13: training in advanced cardiovascular imaging (computed tomography) endorsed by the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society of Atherosclerosis Imaging and Prevention, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51:409-414.
22. Budoff MJ, Cohen MC, Garcia MJ, et al. ACCF/AHA clinical competence statement on cardiac imaging with computed tomography and magnetic resonance: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association/American College of Physicians Task Force on Clinical Competence and Training. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:383-402.
23. Scope of practice for the nuclean medicine technologist. Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Web site. Available at: http://interactive. snmmi.org/index.cfm?PageID=2637. Accessed March 27, 2012.
24. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Procedure guideline for SPECT/ CT imaging 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1227-1234.
25. Delbeke D, Coleman RE, Guiberteau MJ, et al. Procedure guideline for tumor imaging with 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:885-895.
26. Suggested State Regulations for Control of Radiation Part A: Medical Credentialing. Frankfort, KY: The Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors. February 2012. Z1-Z19.
27. Advanced Diagnostic Imaging Accreditation. CMS.gov Web site. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/MedicareProviderSupEnroll/03- AdvancedDiagnosticImagingAccreditation. asp. Accessed March 1, 2012.
28. Abbara S, Arbab-Zadeh A, Callister TQ, et al. SCCT guidelines for performance of coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography Guidelines Committee. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:190-204.
29. Mark DB, Berman DS, Budoff MJ, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SAIP/SCAI/ SCCT 2010 expert consensus document on coronary computed tomographic angiography: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents. Circulation. 2010;121:2509-2543.
30. Greenberger P, Patterson R. Prednisone-diphenhydramine regimen prior to use of radiographic contrast media. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1979;63:295.
31. Yoon AJ, Melduni RM, Duncan SA, Ostfeld RJ, Travin MI. The effect of betablockers on the diagnostic accuracy of vasodilator pharmacologic SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:358-367.
32. Reyes E, Stirrup J, RoughtonM, D'Souza S, Underwood SR, Anagnostopoulos C. 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.
33. Kloner RA. Pharmacology and drug interaction effects of the phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors: focus on alpha-blocker interactions. Am J Cardiol. 2005;96:42M-46M.
34. Chang SM, Nabi F, Xu J, Raza U, Mahmarian JJ. Normal stress-only versus standard stress/rest myocardial perfusion imaging: similar patient mortality with reduced radiation exposure. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:221-230.
35. Duvall WL, Wijetunga MN, Klein TM, et al. The prognosis of a normal stress-only Tc-99m myocardial perfusion imaging study. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:370-377.
36. Des Prez RD, Dahlberg ST, Einstein AJ, et al. ASNC Announcement. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:329.
37. Yamagishi H, Shirai N, Takagi M, et al. Identification of cardiac sarcoidosis with 13N-NH3/18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1030-1036.
38. Okumura W, Iwasaki T, Toyama T, et al. Usefulness of fasting 18F-FDG PET in identification of cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1989-1998.
39. Youssef G, Leung E, Mylonas I, et al. The use of 18F-FDG PET in the diagnosis of cardiac sarcoidosis: a systematic review and metaanalysis including the Ontario experience. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:241-248.
40. Ohira H, Tsujino I, Yoshinaga K. 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in cardiac sarcoidosis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38: 1773-1783.
41. Williams G, Kolodny GM. Suppression of myocardial 18F-FDG uptake by preparing patients with a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet. AJR. 2008;190:W151-W156.
42. Conjoint statement of the SNMMI and the ACNP on credentialing and delineation of privileges for body PET. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1559-1560.
43. Conjoint statement of the SNMMI and the ACNP on credentialing and delineation of privileges for CT performed in conjunction with body SPECT or PET. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1561-1562.
44. Masood Y, Liu YH, Depuey G, et al. Clinical validation of SPECT attenuation correction using x-ray computed tomography-derived attenuation maps: multicenter clinical trial with angiographic correlation. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12:676-686.
45. Bacharach SL. PET/CT attenuation correction: breathing lessons. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:677-679.
46. Koepfli P, Hany TF, Wyss CA, et al. CT attenuation correction for myocardial perfusion quantification using a PET/CT hybrid scanner. J Nucl Med. 2004;45: 537-542.
47. Souvatzoglou M, Bengel F, Busch R, et al. Attenuation correction in cardiac PET/CT with three different CT protocols: a comparison with conventional PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1991-2000.
48. Fricke E, Fricke H,Weise R, et al. Attenuation correction of myocardial SPECT perfusion images with low-dose CT: evaluation of the method by comparison with perfusion PET. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:736-744.
49. Nye JA, Hamill J, Tudorascu D, Carew J, Esteves F, Votaw JR. Comparison of low-pitch and respiratory-averaged CT protocols for attenuation correction of cardiac PET studies. Med Phys. 2009;36:1618-1623.
50. Martinez-Möller A, Zikic D, Botnar RM, et al. Dual cardiac-respiratory gated PET: implementation and results from a feasibility study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1447-1454.
51. Nye JA, Esteves F, Votaw JR. Minimizing artifacts resulting from respiratory and cardiac motion by optimization of the transmission scan in cardiac PET/CT. Med Phys. 2007;34:1901-1906.
52. Teräs M, Kokki T, Durand-Schaefer N, et al. Dual-gated cardiac PET-clinical feasibility study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:505-516.
53. Bai C, Conwell R, Kindem J, et al. Phantom evaluation of a cardiac SPECT/ VCT system that uses a common set of solid-state detectors for both emission and transmission scans. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:459-469.
54. Einstein AJ, Johnson LL, Bokhari S, et al. Agreement of visual estimation of coronary artery calcium from low-dose CT attenuation correction scans in hybrid PET/CT and SPECT/CT with standard Agatston score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56:1914-1921.
55. Schepis T, Gaemperli O, Koepfli P, et al. Use of coronary calcium score scans from stand-alone multislice computed tomography for attenuation correction of myocardial perfusion SPECT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34: 11-19.
56. Burkhard N, Herzog BA, Husmann L, et al. Coronary calcium score scans for attenuation correction of quantitative PET/CT 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:517-521.
57. Herzog BA, Husmann L, Landmesser U, Kaufmann PA. Low-dose computed tomography coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging: cardiac hybrid imaging below 3mSv. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:644.
58. Nakazato R, Dey D, Gutstein A, et al. Coronary artery calcium scoring using a reduced tube voltage and radiation dose protocol with dual-source computed tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:394-400.
59. Scheffel H, Alkadhi H, Leschka S, et al. Low-dose CT coronary angiography in the step-and-shoot mode: diagnostic performance. Heart. 2008;94:1132-1137.
60. Weigold WG, Abbara S, Achenbach S, et al. Standardized medical terminology for cardiac computed tomography: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2011;5:136-144.
61. Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, et al. Feasibility of low-dose coronary CT angiography: first experience with prospective ECG-gating. Eur Heart J. 2008;29:191-197.
62. Javadi M, Mahesh M, McBride G, et al. Lowering radiation dose for integrated assessment of coronary morphology and physiology: first experience with stepand-shoot CT angiography in a rubidium 82 PET-CT protocol. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15:783-790.
63. Husmann L, Herzog BA, Gaemperli O, et al. 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. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:600-607.
64. Labounty TM, Leipsic J, Min JK, et al. Effect of padding duration on radiation dose and image interpretation in prospectively ECG-triggered coronary CT angiography. AJR. 2010;194:933-937.
65. Achenbach S, Marwan M, Ropers D, et al. Coronary computed tomography angiography with a consistent dose below 1 mSv using prospectively electrocardiogram-triggered high-pitch spiral acquisition. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:340-346.
66. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Estimated radiation dose reduction using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: the ERASIR study. AJR. 2010;195:655-660.
67. Leipsic J, Labounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary CT angiography. AJR. 2010;195:649-654.
68. He ZX, Hedrick TD, Pratt CM, et al. Severity of coronary artery calcification by electron beam computed tomography predicts silent myocardial ischemia. Circulation. 2000;101:244-251.
69. Moser KW, O'Keefe JH Jr. Bateman TM, McGhie IA. Coronary calcium screening in asymptomatic patients as a guide to risk factor modification and stress myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2003;10:590-598.
70. Berman DS, Wong ND, Gransar H, et al. Relationship between stress-induced myocardial ischemia and atherosclerosis measured by coronary calcium tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:923-930.
71. Anand DV, Lim E, Raval U, Lipkin D, Lahiri A. Prevalence of silent myocardial ischemia in asymptomatic individuals with subclinical atherosclerosis detected by electron beam tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11:450-457.
72. Raggi P, Berman DS. Computed tomography coronary calcium screening and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12:96-103.
73. Thompson RC, McGhie AI, Moser KW, et al. Clinical utility of coronary calcium scoring after nonischemic myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12:392-400.
74. Anand DV, Lim E, Hopkins D, et al. Risk stratification in uncomplicated type 2 diabetes: prospective evaluation of the combined use of coronary artery calcium imaging and selective myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:713-721.
75. Rosman J, Shapiro M, Pandey A, VanTosh A, Bergmann SR. Lack of correlation between coronary artery calcium and myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13:333-337.
76. Schuijf JD, Wijns W, Jukema JW, et al. A comparative regional analysis of coronary atherosclerosis and calcium score on multislice CT versus myocardial perfusion on SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1749-1755.
77. Schepis T, Gaemperli O, Koepfli P, et al. Added value of coronary artery calcium score as an adjunct to gated SPECT for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in an intermediate-risk population. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1424-1430.
78. Rozanski A, Gransar H, Wong ND, et al. Use of coronary calcium scanning for predicting inducible myocardial ischemia: influence of patients' clinical presentation. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:669-679.
79. Rozanski A, Gransar H, Wong ND, et al. Clinical outcomes after both coronary calcium scanning and exercise myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1352-1361.
80. Scholte AJ, Schuijf JD, Kharagjitsingh AV, et al. Different manifestations of coronary artery disease by stress SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging, coronary calcium scoring, and multislice CT coronary angiography in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15:503-509.
81. Chang SM, Nabi F, Xu J, et al. The coronary artery calcium score and stress myocardial perfusion imaging provide independent and complementary prediction of cardiac risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1872-1882.
82. Blankstein R, Dorbala S. Adding calcium scoring to myocardial perfusion imaging: does it alter physicians' therapeutic decision making? J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:168-171.
83. Nabi F, Chang SM, Pratt CM, et al. Coronary artery calcium scoring in the emergency department: identifying which patients with chest pain can be safely discharged home. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;56:220-229.
84. Hacker M, Jakobs T, Matthiesen F, et al. Comparison of spiral multidetector CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging in the noninvasive detection of functionally relevant coronary artery lesions: first clinical experiences. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1294-1300.
85. Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Curillova Z, et al. Relationship between CT coronary angiography and stress perfusion imaging in patients with suspected ischemic heart disease assessed by integrated PET-CT imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:799-809.
86. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Kalff V, et al. Validation of a new cardiac image fusion software for three-dimensional integration of myocardial perfusion SPECT and stand-alone 64-slice CT angiography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34: 1097-1106.
87. Rispler S, Keidar Z, Ghersin E, et al. Integrated single-photon emission computed tomography and computed tomography coronary angiography for the assessment of hemodynamically significant coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1059-1067.
88. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Koepfli P, et al. Accuracy of 64-slice CT angiography for the detection of functionally relevant coronary stenoses as assessed with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1162-1171.
89. Gallagher MJ, Ross MA, Raff GL, Goldstein JA, O'Neill WW, O'Neil B. The diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography compared with stress nuclear imaging in emergency department low-risk chest pain patients. Ann Emerg Med. 2007;49:125-136.
90. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, et al. Functionally relevant coronary artery disease: comparison of 64-section CT angiography with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Radiology. 2008;248:414-423.
91. Sato A, Hiroe M, Tamura M, et al. Quantitative measures of coronary stenosis severity by 64-slice CT angiography and relation to physiologic significance of perfusion in nonobese patients: comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:564-572.
92. Husmann L, Wiegand M, Valenta I, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography: a comparison with coronary angiography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;24:511-518.
93. Gaemperli O, Husmann L, Schepis T, et al. Coronary CT angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging to detect flow-limiting stenoses: a potential gatekeeper for coronary revascularization? Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2921-2929.
94. Haramati LB, Levsky JM, Jain VR, et al. CT angiography for evaluation of coronary artery disease in inner-city outpatients: an initial prospective comparison with stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;25:303-313.
95. Santana CA, Garcia EV, Faber TL, et al. Diagnostic performance of fusion of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and computed tomography coronary angiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:201-211.
96. van Werkhoven JM, Schuijf JD, Gaemperli O, et al. Prognostic value of multislice computed tomography and gated single-photon emission computed tomography in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:623-632.
97. Pazhenkottil AP, Herzog BA, Husmann L, et al. Non-invasive assessment of coronary artery disease with CT coronary angiography and SPECT: a novel dose-saving fast-track algorithm. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:522-527.
98. Ramakrishna G, Miller TD, Breen JF, Araoz PA, Hodge DO, Gibbons RJ. Relationship and prognostic value of coronary artery calcification by electron beam computed tomography to stress-induced ischemia by single photon emission computed tomography. Am Heart J. 2007;153:807-814.
99. Schenker MP, Dorbala S, Hong EC, et al. Interrelation of coronary calcification, myocardial ischemia, and outcomes in patients with intermediate likelihood of coronary artery disease: a combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography study. Circulation. 2008;117:1693-1700.
100. Tanenbaum SR, Kondos GT, Veselik KE, Prendergast MR, Brundage BH, Chomka EV. Detection of calcific deposits in coronary arteries by ultrafast computed tomography and correlation with angiography. Am J Cardiol. 1989;63:870-872.
101. Wexler L, Brundage B, Crouse J, et al. Coronary artery calcification: pathophysiology, epidemiology, imaging methods, and clinical implications-a statement for health professionals from the American Heart Association Writing Group. Circulation. 1996;94:1175-1192.
102. Sato A, Nozato T, Hikita H, et al. Incremental value of combining 64-slice computed tomography angiography with stress nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging to improve noninvasive detection of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:19-26.
103. Min JK, Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Gibbons R. Clinical benefits of noninvasive testing: coronary computed tomography angiography as a test case. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3:305-315.
104. Hoffmann MH, Shi H, Schmitz BL, et al. Noninvasive coronary angiography with multislice computed tomography. JAMA. 2005;293:2471-2478.
105. 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.
106. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117:1283-1291.
107. Dorbala S, Hachamovitch R, Di Carli MF. Myocardial perfusion imaging and multidetector computed tomographic coronary angiography: appropriate for all patients with suspected coronary artery disease? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48: 2515-2517.
108. Knuuti J. Cardiac hybrid imaging with low radiation dose. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15:743-744.
109. Kaufmann PA, Di Carli MF. Hybrid SPECT/CT and PET/CT imaging: the next step in noninvasive cardiac imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2009;39:341-347.
110. Raff GL, Abidov A, Achenbach S, et al. SCCT guidelines for the interpretation and reporting of coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2009;3:122-136.
111. Killip T, Passamani E, Davis K. Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery-eight years follow-up and survival in patients with reduced ejection fraction. Circulation. 1985;72: V102-V109.
112. 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.
113. Dorbala S, Vangala D, Sampson U, Limaye A, Kwong R, Di Carli MF. Value of vasodilator left ventricular ejection fraction reserve in evaluating the magnitude of myocardium at risk and the extent of angiographic coronary artery disease: a 82Rb PET/CT study. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:349-358.
114. Dorbala S, Hachamovitch R, Curillova Z, et al. Incremental prognostic value of gated Rb-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging over clinical variables and rest LVEF. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2: 846-854.
115. Hachamovitch R, Johnson JR, Hlatky MA, et al. The study of myocardial perfusion and coronary anatomy imaging roles in CAD (SPARC): design, rationale, and baseline patient characteristics of a prospective, multicenter observational registry comparing PET, SPECT, and CTA for resource utilization and clinical outcomes. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:935-948.
116. Dey D, Slomka PJ, Hahn LJ, Kloiber R. Automatic three-dimensional multimodality registration using radionuclide transmission CT attenuation maps: a phantom study. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:448-455.
117. Slomka PJ. Software approach to merging molecular with anatomic information. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(suppl 1):36S-45S.
118. Slomka PJ, Cheng VY, Dey D, et al. Quantitative analysis of myocardial perfusion SPECT anatomically guided by coregistered 64-slice coronary CT angiography. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1621-1630.
119. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, et al. Cardiac image fusion from stand-alone SPECT and CT: clinical experience. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:696-703.
120. 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.
121. Javadi MS, Lautamaki R, Merrill J, et al. Definition of vascular territories on myocardial perfusion images by integration with true coronary anatomy: a hybrid PET/CT analysis. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:198-203.
122. Wagner B, Anton M, Nekolla SG, et al. Noninvasive characterization of myocardial molecular interventions by integrated positron emission tomography and computed tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:2107-2115.
123. Lautamäki R, Schuleri KH, Sasano T, et al. Integration of infarct size, tissue perfusion, and metabolism by hybrid cardiac positron emission tomography/ computed tomography: evaluation in a porcine model of myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:299-305.
124. Knuuti J. Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) in coronary disease. Heart. 2009;95:1457-1463.
125. Tilkemeier PL, Cooke DC, Grossman GB, McCallister BD, Ward PR. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Web site. Standardized reporting of radionuclide myocardial perfusion and function. Available at: http://www.asnc.org/ imageuploads/ImagingGuidelinesReportingJuly2009.pdf. Published 2009. Accessed March 1, 2012.
126. Douglas PS, Hendel RC, Cummings JE, et al. ACCF/ACR/AHA/ASE/ ASNC/HRS/NASCI/RSNA/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR 2008 health policy statement on structured reporting in cardiovascular imaging. Endorsed by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. Circulation. 2009;119:187-200.
127. Hendel RC, Budoff MJ, Cardella JF, et al. ACC/AHA/ACR/ASE/ASNC/HRS/ NASCI/RSNA/SAIP/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/SIR 2008 key data elements and definitions for cardiac imaging: a report of the American College of Cardiology/ American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Data Standards (Writing Committee to Develop Clinical Data Standards for Cardiac Imaging). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:91-124.
128. Bluemke DA, Achenbach S, Budoff M, et al. Noninvasive coronary artery imaging: magnetic resonance angiography and multidetector computed tomography angiography-a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Committee on Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention of the Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, and the Councils on Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Disease in the Young. Circulation. 2008;118:586-606.
129. Husmann L, Tatsugami F, Aepli U, et al. Prevalence of noncardiac findings on low dose 64-slice computed tomography used for attenuation correction in myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009; 25:859-865.
130. Lehman SJ, Abbara S, Cury RC, et al. Significance of cardiac computed tomography incidental findings in acute chest pain. Am J Med. 2009;122:543-549.
131. ACR technical standard for diagnostic medical physics performance monitoring of computed tomography (CT) equipment. American College of Radiology Web site. Available at: http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality- safety/guidelines/med-phys/ct-equipment.aspx. Published 2007. Accessed March 1, 2012.
132. Gould KL, Pan T, Loghin C, Johnson NP, Guha A, Sdringola S. Frequent diagnostic errors in cardiac PET/CT due to misregistration of CT attenuation and emission PET images: a definitive analysis of causes, consequences, and corrections. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1112-1121.
133. Goetze S, Wahl RL. Prevalence of misregistration between SPECT and CT for attenuation-corrected myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14: 200-206.
134. Lautamäki R, Brown TL,Merrill J, Bengel FM. CT-based attenuation correction in 82Rb-myocardial perfusion PET-CT: incidence of misalignment and effect on regional tracer distribution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:305-310.
135. Horii Y, Yoshimura N, Hori Y, et al. Relationship between heart rate and optimal reconstruction phase in dual-source CT coronary angiography. Acad Radiol. 2011;18:726-730.
136. Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, Cerqueira MD, Henzlova MJ. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation. 2007;116: 1290-1305.
137. Kim KP, Einstein AJ, Berrington de Gonzalez A. Coronary artery calcification screening: estimated radiation dose and cancer risk. Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169:1188-1194.
138. Cerqueira MD, Allman KC, Ficaro EP, et al. Recommendations for reducing radiation exposure in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:709-718.
139. Sharir T, Slomka PJ, Hayes SW, et al. Multicenter trial of high-speed versus conventional single-photon emission computed tomography imaging: quantitative results of myocardial perfusion and left ventricular function. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55:1965-1974.
140. DePuey EG, Bommireddipalli S, Clark J, Thompson L, Srour Y. Wide beam reconstruction "quarter-time" gated myocardial perfusion SPECT functional imaging: a comparison to "full-time" ordered subset expectation maximum. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:736-752.
141. DePuey EG, Gadiraju R, Clark J, Thompson L, Anstett F, Shwartz SC. Ordered subset expectation maximization and wide beam reconstruction "half-time" gated myocardial perfusion SPECT functional imaging: a comparison to "full-time" filtered backprojection. J Nucl Cardiol. 2008;15:547-563.
142. Ali I, Ruddy TD, Almgrahi A, Anstett FG, Wells RG. Half-time SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging with attenuation correction. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:554-562.
143. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hadamitzky M, et al. Radiation dose estimates from cardiac multislice computed tomography in daily practice: impact of different scanning protocols on effective dose estimates. Circulation. 2006;113:1305-1310.
144. Hausleiter J, Meyer T, Hermann F, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with cardiac CT angiography. JAMA. 2009;301:500-507.
145. Shuman WP, Branch KR, May JM, et al. Prospective versus retrospective ECG gating for 64-detector CT of the coronary arteries: comparison of image quality and patient radiation dose. Radiology. 2008;248:431-437.
146. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: Addendum 2 to ICRP publication 53. Ann ICRP. 1998;28:1-126.
147. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: a third addendum to ICRP publication 53, ICRP publication 106-approved by the Commission in October 2007. Ann ICRP. 2008;38:1-197.
148. Stabin MG. Proposed revision to the radiation dosimetry of 82Rb. Health Phys. 2010;99:811-813.
149. International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 53: radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals. Ann ICRP. 1988;18:1-4.
150. Russell JR, Stabin MG, Sparks RB, Watson E. Radiation absorbed dose to the embryo/fetus from radiopharmaceuticals. Health Phys. 1997;73:756-769.
151. Stabin MG. Proposed addendum to previously published fetal dose estimate tables for 18F-FDG. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:634-635.
152. Maddahi J, Mendez R, Mahmarian JJ, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of rapid, gated SPECT myocardial perfusion upright imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:351-357.