| Title |
First validation of myocardial flow reserve assessed by dynamic 99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT camera: head to head comparison with 15O-water PET and fractional flow reserve in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. The WATERDAY study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00259-018-3958-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Denis Agostini, Vincent Roule, Catherine Nganoa, Nathaniel Roth, Raphael Baavour, Jean-Jacques Parienti, Farzin Beygui, Alain Manrique |
| Abstract |
We assessed the feasibility of myocardial blood flow (MBF) and flow reserve (MFR) estimation using dynamic SPECT with a novel CZT camera in patients with stable CAD, in comparison with15O-water PET and fractional flow reserve (FFR). Thirty patients were prospectively included and underwent FFR measurements in the main coronary arteries (LAD, LCx, RCA). A stenosis ≥50% was considered obstructive and a FFR abnormal if ≤0.8. All patients underwent a dynamic rest/stress99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT and15O-water PET for MBF and MFR calculation. Net retention kinetic modeling was applied to SPECT data to estimate global uptake values, and MBF was derived using Leppo correction. Ischemia by PET and CZT-SPECT was considered present if MFR was lower than 2 and 2.1, respectively. CZT-SPECT yielded higher stress and rest MBF compared to PET for global and LAD and LCx territories, but not in RCA territory. MFR was similar in global and each vessel territory for both modalities. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive value of CZT-SPECT were, respectively, 83.3, 95.8, 93.3, 100 and 85.7% for the detection of ischemia and 58.3, 84.6, 81.1, 36.8 and 93% for the detection of hemodynamically significant stenosis (FFR ≤ 0.8). Dynamic99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT was technically feasible and provided similar MFR compared to15O-water PET and high diagnostic value for detecting impaired MFR and abnormal FFR in patients with stable CAD. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 111 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 15% |
| Researcher | 16 | 14% |
| Other | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 17% |
| Unknown | 27 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 52 | 47% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 5 | 5% |
| Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 10% |
| Unknown | 30 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 December 2018.
All research outputs
#15,501,594
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#1,866
of 3,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,997
of 332,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
#27
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,083 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.