Nuclear cardiology practice and associated radiation doses in Europe: results of the IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Study (INCAPS) for the 27 European countries

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 718-728

  Lindner, Oliver ^a   Pascual, Thomas N B ^b   Mercuri, Mathew ^c   Acampa, Wanda ^d   Burchert, Wolfgang ^a   Flotats, Albert ^e   Kaufmann, Philipp A ^f   Kitsiou, Anastasia ^g   Knuuti, Juhani ^h   Underwood, S Richard ^i,j   Vitola, João V ^k   Mahmarian, John J ^l   Karthikeyan, Ganesan ^m   Better, Nathan ⁿ   Rehani, Madan M ^b,o   Kashyap, Ravi ^b   Dondi, Maurizio ^b   Paez, Diana ^b   Einstein, Andrew J ^c  

^a RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

^b INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY   (Austria)

^c NewYork Presbyterian Hospital   (United States)

^d CNR   (Italy)

^e UNIVERSITAT AUTÒNOMA DE BARCELONA   (Spain)

^f UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^g SISMANOGLIO HOSPITAL   (Greece)

^h TURKU UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Finland)

ⁱ NATIONAL HEART AND LUNG INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^j ROYAL BROMPTON AND HAREFIELD NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^k Diagnostic and Therapy Clinic   (Brazil)

^l HOUSTON METHODIST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^m ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (India)

ⁿ UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^o MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Best practices; Europe; Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy; Nuclear cardiology; PET; Quality of care; Radiation dose; SPECT

Indexed keywords

TECHNETIUM 99M;

ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CAMERA; CARDIOLOGY; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DOSIMETRY; EUROPE; EUROPEAN; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; LABORATORY TEST; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR CARDIOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; SEX DIFFERENCE; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; ADVERSE EFFECTS; CARDIAC IMAGING; DEVICES; EUROPEAN UNION; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS;

CARDIAC IMAGING TECHNIQUES; CARDIOLOGY; EUROPEAN UNION; NUCLEAR MEDICINE; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RADIATION DOSAGE; SOCIETIES, SCIENTIFIC;

EID: 84959079601     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-015-3270-8     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Jaarsma C, Leiner T, Bekkers SC, Crijns HJ, Wildberger JE, Nagel E, 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;59:1719–28.
2. Metz LD, Beattie M, Hom R, Redberg RF, Grady D, Fleischmann KE. The prognostic value of normal exercise myocardial perfusion imaging and exercise echocardiography: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:227–37.
3. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Beanlands RS, Merhige ME, Williams BA, Veledar E, et al. Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: results from a multicenter observational registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:176–84.
4. Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Shaw LJ, Stone GW, Thomson LE, Friedman JD, et al. Impact of ischaemia and scar on the therapeutic benefit derived from myocardial revascularization vs. medical therapy among patients undergoing stress-rest myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1012–24.
5. Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, Mancini GB, Hayes SW, Hartigan PM, 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;117:1283–91.
6. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, Ross JS, Chen J, Ting HH, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:849–57.
7. Einstein AJ, Weiner SD, Bernheim A, Kulon M, Bokhari S, Johnson LL, et al. Multiple testing, cumulative radiation dose, and clinical indications in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging. JAMA. 2010;304:2137–44.
8. Berrington de Gonzalez A, Kim KP, Smith-Bindman R, McAreavey D. Myocardial perfusion scans: projected population cancer risks from current levels of use in the United States. Circulation. 2010;122:2403–10.
9. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Delbeke D, Abbara S, DePuey EG, Dilsizian V, et al. SNMMI/ASNC/SCCT guideline for cardiac SPECT/CT and PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1485–507.
10. Hesse B, Tagil K, Cuocolo A, Anagnostopoulos C, Bardiés M, Bax J, et al. EANM/ESC procedural guidelines for myocardial perfusion imaging in nuclear cardiology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:855–97.
11. Marcassa C, Zoccarato O, Calza P, Campini R. Temporal evolution of administered activity in cardiac gated SPECT and patients’ effective dose: analysis of an historical series. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:325–30.
12. Tilkemeier P, Green J, Einstein AJ, Fazel R, Reames P, Shaw LJ. The evolving practice of nuclear cardiology: results from the 2011 ASNC member survey. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:1170–5.
13. Lindner O, Bengel FM, Hacker M, Schafer W, Burchert W. Use of myocardial perfusion imaging and estimation of associated radiation doses in Germany from 2005 to 2012. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:963–71.
14. Einstein A, Pascual T, Mercuri M, Karthikeyan G, Vitola JV, Mahmarian JJ, et al. Current worldwide nuclear cardiology practices and radiation exposure: results from the 65 country IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Cross-Sectional Study (INCAPS). Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1689–96.
15. Cousins C, Miller DL, Bernardi G, Rehani MM, Schofield P, Vañó E, et al. ICRP Publication 120: Radiological protection in cardiology. Ann ICRP. 2013;42:1–125.
16. Senthamizhchelvan S, Bravo PE, Esaias C, Lodge MA, Merrill J, Hobbs RF, et al. Human biodistribution and radiation dosimetry of 82Rb. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1592–9.
17. Cerqueira MD, Allman KC, Ficaro EP, Hansen CL, Nichols KJ, Thompson RC, et al. Recommendations for reducing radiation exposure in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:709–18.
18. Einstein AJ, Moser KW, Thompson RC, Cerqueira MD, Henzlova MJ. Radiation dose to patients from cardiac diagnostic imaging. Circulation. 2007;116:1290–305.
19. Holly TA, Abbott BG, Al-Mallah M, Calnon DA, Cohen MC, DiFilippo FP, et al. Single photon-emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:941–73.
20. International Atomic Energy Agency. Nuclear cardiology: Guidance and recommendations for implementation in developing countries. IAEA human health series no. 23. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2012.
21. Henzlova MJ, Cerqueira MD, Mahmarian JJ, Yao SS. Stress protocols and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13:e80–90.
22. Moran AE, Forouzanfar MH, Roth GA, Mensah GA, Ezzati M, Murray CJ, et al. Temporal trends in ischemic heart disease mortality in 21 world regions, 1980 to 2010: The global burden of disease 2010 study. Circulation. 2014;129:1483–92.
23. European Commission. Radiation Protection 109. Guidance on diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) for medical exposures, Luxembourg; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
24. Council Directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 on health protection of individuals against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing Directive 84/466/Euratom. Off J Eur Communities. 1997;L180:22–7.
25. Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 05 December 2013 Laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom. Official J Eur Commununities. 2014:L13/1-/72.
26. Parker MW, Iskandar A, Limone B, Perugini A, Kim H, Jones C, 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;5:700–7.
27. Knuuti J, Bengel F, Bax JJ, Kaufmann PA, Le Guludec D, Perrone Filardi P, et al. Risks and benefits of cardiac imaging: an analysis of risks related to imaging for coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:633–8.
28. 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;55:221–30.
29. Lindner O, Burchert W, Schäfers M, Schäfer W. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy 2012 in Germany. Results of the 6th query. Nuklearmedizin. 2014;53:13–8.