Enhanced detection of reversible perfusion defects by Tc-99m sestamibi compared to Tc-99m tetrofosmin during vasodilator stress SPECT imaging in mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease
P. Soman et al., Enhanced detection of reversible perfusion defects by Tc-99m sestamibi compared to Tc-99m tetrofosmin during vasodilator stress SPECT imaging in mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease, J AM COL C, 37(2), 2001, pp. 458-462
Citations number
38
Categorie Soggetti
Cardiovascular & Respiratory Systems","Cardiovascular & Hematology Research
OBJECTIVES We prospectively compared dipyridamole single-photon emission co
mputed tomography (SPECT) imaging with Tc-99m sestamibi and Tc-99m tetrofos
min for the detection of reversible perfusion defects in patients with mild
-to-moderate coronary artery disease.
BACKGROUND Tc-99m tetrofosmin has a lower first-pass myocardial extraction
fraction compared to Tc-99m sestamibi and thus could underestimate mild per
fusion defects.
METHODS Eighty-one patients with 50% to 90% stenosis in one or two major ep
icardial vessels without previous myocardial infarction, and seven with <5%
probability of coronary artery disease underwent dipyridamole SPECT imagin
g with both agents. The SPECT data were analyzed quantitatively.
RESULTS Tc-99m sestamibi detected reversible perfusion defects in a greater
number of segments (total 363 and 285, p < 0.001, and mean +/- SD, 2.2 +/-
3.0 and 1.8 +/- 2.5 per patient, p = 0.008, for Tc-99m sestamibi and Tc-99
m tetrofosmin, respectively), demonstrated a lamer extent of perfusion defe
ct (mean +/- SD, 15.8% +/- 12.3% and 12.0% +/- 11.4%, p < 0.03, for Tc-99m
sestamibi and Tc-99m tetrofosmin, respectively) and more often correctly id
entified patients with disease in more than one coronary artery (p = 0.02).
There was better defect contrast with Tc-99m sestamibi (defect/normal wall
count ratios were 0.60 +/- 0.15 vs. 0.73 +/- 0.14 for Tc-99m sestamibi and
Tc99m tetrofosmin, respectively, p = 0.01:, for reversible defects seen in
identical segments with both agents; and 0.73 +/- 0.16 vs 0.79 +/- 0.17, r
espectively p < 0.01, for reversible defects detected with either agent alo
ne). There was no significant difference in diagnostic sensitivity or image
quality.
CONCLUSIONS These differences between two commonly used tracers may have si
gnificant diagnostic and prognostic implications. (C) 2001 by the American
College of Cardiology.