Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Quality metrics for single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: an ASNC information statement

  • INFORMATION STATEMENT
  • Published:
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Abbreviations

ASNC:

American Society of Nuclear Cardiology

ALARA:

As low as reasonably achievable

AUC:

Appropriate use criteria

BMI:

Body mass index

CABG:

Coronary artery bypass surgery

CAD:

Coronary artery disease

CT:

Computed tomography

CVD:

Cardiovascular disease

CZT:

Cadmium zinc telluride

ECG:

Electrocardiogram

IAEA:

International Atomic Energy Agency

LV:

Left ventricular

LVEF:

LV ejection fraction

MPI:

Myocardial perfusion imaging

PCI:

Percutaneous coronary intervention

PET:

Positron emission tomography

RV:

Right ventricular

SPECT:

Single-photon emission computed tomography

TID:

Transient ischemic dilation

References

  1. Dorbala S, Ananthasubramaniam K, Armstrong IS, et al. Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging guidelines: Instrumentation, acquisition, processing, and interpretation. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:1784‐846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-018-1283-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tilkemeier PL, Bourque J, Doukky R, Sanghani R, Weinberg RL. ASNC imaging guidelines for nuclear cardiology procedures: Standardized reporting of nuclear cardiology procedures. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:2064‐128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-1057-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Henzlova MJ, Duvall WL, Einstein AJ, Travin MI, Verberne HJ. ASNC imaging guidelines for SPECT nuclear cardiology procedures: Stress, protocols, and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:606‐39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0387-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Patel MR, Calhoon JH, Dehmer GJ, et al. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2016 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24(2):439–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-0780-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ronan G, Wolk MJ, Bailey SR, et al. ACCF/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2013 multimodality appropriate use criteria for the detection and risk assessment of stable ischemic heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Nucl Cardiol 2014;21:192‐220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-013-9841-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Patel MR, Bailey SR, Bonow RO, et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate use criteria for diagnostic catheterization: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1995‐2027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2012.03.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Patel MR, Dehmer GJ, Hirshfeld JW, et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;143:780‐803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2012.01.061.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hendel RC, Berman DS, Di Carli MF, et al. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 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. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:2201‐29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.02.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Skali H, Murthy VL, Paez D, et al. Guidance and best practices for reestablishment of non-emergent care in nuclear cardiology laboratories during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: An information statement from ASNC, IAEA, and SNMMI: Endorsed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. J Nucl Cardiol 2020;27:1855‐62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-020-02203-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Abidov A, Dilsizian V, Doukky R, et al. Aminophylline shortage and current recommendations for reversal of vasodilator stress: An ASNC information statement endorsed by SCMR. J Nucl Cardiol 2019;26:1007‐14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-018-01548-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Abbott BG, Case JA, Dorbala S, et al. Contemporary cardiac SPECT imaging-innovations and best practices: An information statement from the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:1847‐60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-018-1348-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Taqueti VR, Dorbala S, Wolinsky D, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging in women for the evaluation of stable ischemic heart disease-state-of-the-evidence and clinical recommendations. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:1402‐26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-0926-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Fazel R, Dilsizian V, Einstein AJ, Ficaro EP, Henzlova M, Shaw LJ. Strategies for defining an optimal risk-benefit ratio for stress myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18:385‐92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-011-9353-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hendel RC, Abbott BG, Bateman TM, et al. The role of radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging for asymptomatic individuals. J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18:3‐15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-010-9320-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cerqueira MD, Allman KC, Ficaro EP, et al. Recommendations for reducing radiation exposure in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:709‐18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-010-9244-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ficaro EP, Zanzonico P, Stabin MG, Raff GL, Thompson RC, Einstein AJ ea. Variability in radiation dose estimates from nuclear and computed tomography diagnostic imaging: ASNC Information Statement. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16:161.

  17. Des Prez RD, Shaw LJ, Gillespie RL, et al. Cost-effectiveness of myocardial perfusion imaging: A summary of the currently available literature. J Nucl Cardiol 2005;12:750‐9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2005.10.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Depuey EG, Mahmarian JJ, Miller TD, et al. Patient-centered imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19:185‐215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-012-9523-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Paez D, Gnanasegaran G, Fanti S, et al. COVID-19 pandemic: Guidance for nuclear medicine departments. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020;47:1615‐9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04825-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Mosca L, Benjamin EJ, Berra K, et al. Effectiveness-based guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women–2011 update: A guideline from the American Heart Association. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;57:1404‐23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.02.005.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Greenland P, Alpert JS, Beller GA, et al. 2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:e50-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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 [added]. Circulation 2009;119(1):187–200. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.191365

  23. The IAC Standards and Guidelines for Nuclear/PET Accreditation. https://www.intersocietal.org/nuclear/standards/IACNuclearPETStandards2016.pdf

  24. American College of Radiology Accreditation Information: Nuclear Medicine and PET. https://accreditationsupport.acr.org/support/solutions/articles/11000063279-complete-accreditation-information-nuclear-medicine-and-pet

  25. Bonow RO, Douglas PS, Buxton AE, et al. ACCF/AHA methodology for the development of quality measures for cardiovascular technology: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1517‐38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Spertus JA, Bonow RO, Chan P, et al. ACCF/AHA new insights into the methodology of performance measurement: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on performance measures. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:1767‐82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Kline KP, Plumb J, Nguyen L, et al. Patient and provider attitudes on appropriate use criteria for myocardial perfusion imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2017;10:824‐5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.08.013.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Iskandrian AE, Hage FG, Shaw LJ, Mahmarian JJ, Berman DS. Serial myocardial perfusion imaging: Defining a significant change and targeting management decisions. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2014;7:79‐96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2013.05.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Moody WE, Lin ELS, Thomson LE, et al. Results of serial myocardial perfusion imaging in end-stage renal disease. Am J Cardiol 2018;121:661‐7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.11.038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Berman DS, Kang X, Gransar H, et al. Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion abnormality on SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging is more reproducible than expert visual analysis. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16:45‐53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-008-9018-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Shaw LJ, Berman DS. Sequential single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging. Am J Cardiol 2005;96:28J-39J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.06.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Farzaneh-Far A, Phillips HR, Shaw LK, et al. Ischemia change in stable coronary artery disease is an independent predictor of death and myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:715‐24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.01.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. El-Hajj S, AlJaroudi WA, Farag A, et al. Effect of changes in perfusion defect size during serial regadenoson myocardial perfusion imaging on cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk patients. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:101‐12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0174-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Circulation 2012;126:e354-471. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0b013e318277d6a0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ladapo JA, Blecker S, O’Donnell M, Jumkhawala SA, Douglas PS. Appropriate use of cardiac stress testing with imaging: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2016;11:e0161153. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0161153.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Shaw LJ, Blumenthal RS, Raggi P. Screening asymptomatic low-risk individuals for coronary heart disease: Issues and controversies. J Nucl Cardiol 2004;11:382‐7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2004.04.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hendel RC, Cerqueira M, Douglas PS, et al. A multicenter assessment of the use of single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging with appropriateness criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:156‐62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Winchester DE, Merritt J, Waheed N, et al. Implementation of appropriate use criteria for cardiology tests and procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2021;7:34‐41. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcaa029.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Doukky R, Hayes K, Frogge N, et al. Impact of appropriate use on the prognostic value of single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging. Circulation 2013;128:1634‐43. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.002744.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Khawaja FJ, Jouni H, Miller TD, Hodge DO, Gibbons RJ. Downstream clinical implications of abnormal myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography based on appropriate use criteria. J Nucl Cardiol 2013;20:1041‐8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-013-9794-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Koh AS, Flores JL, Keng FY, Tan RS, Chua TS. Correlation between clinical outcomes and appropriateness grading for referral to myocardial perfusion imaging for preoperative evaluation prior to non-cardiac surgery. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19:277‐84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-011-9462-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lin FY, Dunning AM, Narula J, et al. Impact of an automated multimodality point-of-order decision support tool on rates of appropriate testing and clinical decision making for individuals with suspected coronary artery disease: a prospective multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:308‐16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.04.059.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Elgendy IY, Mahmoud A, Shuster JJ, Doukky R, Winchester DE. Outcomes after inappropriate nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging: A meta-analysis. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:680‐9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0240-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Doukky R, Diemer G, Medina A, et al. Promoting appropriate use of cardiac imaging: no longer an academic exercise. Ann Intern Med 2017;166:438‐40. https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2673.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tilkemeier PL, Doukky R, Kirkpatrick JN, Desai MY, Nagueh SF. Coming-of-age: The ImageGuide™ registry at three. J Nucl Cardiol 2019;26:72‐5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-018-1442-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Doukky R. PAMA implementation: The road ahead. J Nucl Cardiol 2019;26:1789‐91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-019-01942-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sabik JF, Lytle BW, Blackstone EH, Houghtaling PL, Cosgrove DM. Comparison of saphenous vein and internal thoracic artery graft patency by coronary system. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79(2):544–51; discussion 544–51. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.07.047

  48. Kimura T, Yokoi H, Nakagawa Y, et al. Three-year follow-up after implantation of metallic coronary-artery stents. N Engl J Med 1996;334:561‐6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199602293340903.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Weisz G, Leon MB, Holmes DR, et al. Five-year follow-up after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation results of the SIRIUS (Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in De-Novo Native Coronary Lesions) Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:1488‐97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.01.050.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Byrne R, Iijima R, Mehilli J, et al. Treatment of Paclitaxel-eluting stent restenosis with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: Angiographic and clinical outcomes. Rev Esp Cardiol 2008;61:1134‐9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Nightingale JM, Murphy FJ, Blakeley C. “I thought it was just an x-ray”: A qualitative investigation of patient experiences in cardiac SPECT-CT imaging. Nucl Med Commun 2012;33:246‐54. https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834f90c6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. MacKenzie R, Sims C, Owens RG, Dixon AK. Patients’ perceptions of magnetic resonance imaging. Clin Radiol 1995;50:137‐43. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0009-9260(05)83042-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Code of Medical Ethics. American Medical Association. https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/informed-consent

  54. Grady C. Enduring and emerging challenges of informed consent. N Engl J Med 2015;372:2172. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1503813.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Schenker Y, Meisel A. Informed consent in clinical care: Practical considerations in the effort to achieve ethical goals. JAMA 2011;305:1130‐1. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.333.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. De Man S, Gemmel P, Vlerick P, Van Rijk P, Dierckx R. Patients’ and personnel’s perceptions of service quality and patient satisfaction in nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002;29:1109‐17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-002-0869-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Institute for Health Care Improvement. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/Measures/ThirdNextAvailableAppointment.aspx

  58. Rose KD, Ross JS, Horwitz LI. Advanced access scheduling outcomes: A systematic review. Arch Intern Med 2011;171:1150‐9. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2011.168.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  59. Tuot DS, Sewell JL, Day L, Leeds K, Chen AH. Increasing access to specialty care: Patient discharges from a gastroenterology clinic. Am J Manag Care 2014;20:812‐9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Dilsizian V, Gewirtz H, Paivanas N, et al. Serious and potentially life threatening complications of cardiac stress testing: Physiological mechanisms and management strategies. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22(6):1198–213; quiz 1195–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0141-4

  61. Ivarsson B, Larsson S, Sjöberg T. Postponed or cancelled heart operations from the patient’s perspective. J Nurs Manag 2004;12:28‐36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2004.00400.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Argo JL, Vick CC, Graham LA, Itani KM, Bishop MJ, Hawn MT. Elective surgical case cancellation in the Veterans Health Administration system: identifying areas for improvement. Am J Surg 2009;198:600‐6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.07.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Glickman SW, Boulding W, Manary M, et al. Patient satisfaction and its relationship with clinical quality and inpatient mortality in acute myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2010;3:188‐95. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.109.900597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Case J CS, Bateman T. Myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography attenuation correction. Oxford University ed. Nuclear cardiac imaging: principles and applications. Oxford University; 2003.

  65. Bidgood WD, Horii SC, Prior FW, Van Syckle DE. Understanding and using DICOM, the data interchange standard for biomedical imaging. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1997;4:199‐212. https://doi.org/10.1136/jamia.1997.0040199.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Seo Y, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Technological development and advances in single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med 2008;38:177‐98. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2008.01.001.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  67. Hudson HM, Larkin RS. Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1994;13:601‐9. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.363108.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Miwa K, Wagatsuma K, Nemoto R, et al. Detection of sub-centimeter lesions using digital TOF-PET/CT system combined with Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm. Ann Nucl Med 2020;34:762‐71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-020-01500-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Gambhir SS, Berman DS, Ziffer J, et al. A novel high-sensitivity rapid-acquisition single-photon cardiac imaging camera. J Nucl Med 2009;50:635‐43. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.060020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Esteves FP, Raggi P, Folks RD, et al. Novel solid-state-detector dedicated cardiac camera for fast myocardial perfusion imaging: multicenter comparison with standard dual detector cameras. J Nucl Cardiol 2009;16:927‐34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-009-9137-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Worden NE, Lindower PD, Burns TL, Chatterjee K, Weiss RM. A second look with prone SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging reduces the need for angiography in patients at low risk for cardiac death or MI. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22:115‐22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9934-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Ben-Haim S, Almukhailed O, Neill J, et al. Clinical value of supine and upright myocardial perfusion imaging in obese patients using the D-SPECT camera. J Nucl Cardiol 2014;21:478‐85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9853-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Ficaro EP, Fessler JA, Shreve PD, Kritzman JN, Rose PA, Corbett JR. Simultaneous transmission/emission myocardial perfusion tomography. Diagnostic accuracy of attenuation-corrected 99mTc-sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 1996;93(3):463–73. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.93.3.463

  74. Allie R, Hutton BF, Prvulovich E, Bomanji J, Michopoulou S, Ben-Haim S. Pitfalls and artifacts using the D-SPECT dedicated cardiac camera. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:301‐10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0277-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Garcia EV, Faber TL, Esteves FP. Cardiac dedicated ultrafast SPECT cameras: new designs and clinical implications. J Nucl Med 2011;52:210‐7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.110.081323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Image Wisely®. https://www.imagewisely.org.

  77. Image Gently®. https://www.imagegently.org.

  78. NEMA NU 1–2018. Performance measurements of gamma cameras. NEMA. Standards Publication. https://www.nema.org/news-trends/view/Standard-Defines-Measurement-Methods-for-Performance-Parameters-of-SPECT-Scanners.

  79. DePuey E. Single-photon emission computed tomography artifacts. In: Zaret B BG, eds., ed. Nuclear cardiology: State of the art and future directions. 4th ed. Elsevier; 2010:72–95:chap 5.

  80. DePuey E. Nuclear cardiac imaging. In: Iskandrian AE GE, eds. 5th ed. Oxford University Press; 2016:137–177: Image Artifacts.

  81. Xu Y, Hayes S, Ali I, et al. Automatic and visual reproducibility of perfusion and function measures for myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:1050‐7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-010-9297-0.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Slomka PJ, Rubeaux M, Germano G. Quantification with normal limits: New cameras and low-dose imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:1637‐40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0563-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Braat SH, Leclercq B, Itti R, Lahiri A, Sridhara B, Rigo P. Myocardial imaging with technetium-99m-tetrofosmin: Comparison of one-day and two-day protocols. J Nucl Med 1994;35:1581‐5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.09.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Henzlova MJ, Croft LB, Duvall WL. Stress-only imaging: faster, cheaper, less radiation. So what's the hold up? J Nucl Cardiol 2013;20(1):17–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-012-9652-4

  86. Nuclear Cardiology: Its role in cost effective care. https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1516_web.pdf

  87. Einstein AJ, Pascual TN, Mercuri M, 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. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv117.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  88. Chaudhry W, Hussain N, Ahlberg AW, et al. Multicenter evaluation of stress-first myocardial perfusion image triage by nuclear technologists and automated quantification. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:809‐20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0291-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Gowdar S, Chaudhry W, Ahlberg AW, Henzlova MJ, Duvall WL. Triage of patients for attenuation-corrected stress-first Tc-99m SPECT MPI using a simplified clinical pre-test scoring model. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:1178‐87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-0832-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Rouhani S, Al Shahrani A, Hossain A, et al. A clinical tool to identify candidates for stress-first myocardial perfusion imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13:2193‐202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.03.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Thompson RC, O’Keefe JH, McGhie AI, Bybee KA, Thompson EC, Bateman TM. Reduction of SPECT MPI radiation dose using contemporary protocols and technology. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:282‐3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.03.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Eckerman K, Harrison J, Menzel HG, Clement CH, ICRP. ICRP Publication 119: Compendium of dose coefficients based on ICRP Publication 60. Ann ICRP 2012;41 Suppl 1:1–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.icrp.2012.06.038

  93. Andersson M, Johansson L, Minarik D, Leide-Svegborn S, Mattsson S. Effective dose to adult patients from 338 radiopharmaceuticals estimated using ICRP biokinetic data, ICRP/ICRU computational reference phantoms and ICRP 2007 tissue weighting factors. EJNMMI Phys 2014;1:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/2197-7364-1-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  94. Andersson M. Erratum to: Effective dose to adult patients from 338 radiopharmaceuticals estimated using ICRP biokinetic data, ICRP/ICRU computational reference phantoms and ICRP 2007 tissue weighting factors. EJNMMI Phys 2015;2:22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-015-0121-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Hansen CL. Digital image processing for clinicians, part III: SPECT reconstruction. J Nucl Cardiol 2002;9:542‐9. https://doi.org/10.1067/mnc.2002.122899.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Borges-Neto S, Pagnanelli RA, Shaw LK, et al. Clinical results of a novel wide beam reconstruction method for shortening scan time of Tc-99m cardiac SPECT perfusion studies. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:555‐65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.04.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Henzlova MJ, Duvall WL. The future of SPECT MPI: time and dose reduction. J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18:580‐7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-011-9401-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Fazel R, Krumholz HM, Wang Y, et al. Exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation from medical imaging procedures. N Engl J Med 2009;361:849‐57. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0901249.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Oddstig J, Hindorf C, Hedeer F, et al. The radiation dose to overweighted patients undergoing myocardial perfusion SPECT can be significantly reduced: Validation of a linear weight-adjusted activity administration protocol. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:1912‐21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0628-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. van Dijk JD, Jager PL, Ottervanger JP, et al. Development and validation of a patient-tailored dose regime in myocardial perfusion imaging using conventional SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:134‐42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0246-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Thompson RC, Burgett EV. Patient centered imaging and the dose of radiopharmaceuticals. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:143‐4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0263-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Shaw LJ, Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, et al. The economic consequences of available diagnostic and prognostic strategies for the evaluation of stable angina patients: an observational assessment of the value of precatheterization ischemia. Economics of Noninvasive Diagnosis (END) Multicenter Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33(3):661–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00606-8

  103. Miller RJH, Hu LH, Gransar H, et al. Transient ischaemic dilation and post-stress wall motion abnormality increase risk in patients with less than moderate ischaemia: analysis of the REFINE SPECT registry. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;21:567‐75. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jez172.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Alama M, Labos C, Emery H, et al. Diagnostic and prognostic significance of transient ischemic dilation (TID) in myocardial perfusion imaging: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:724‐37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-017-1040-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Bajaj NS, Singh S, Farag A, et al. The prognostic value of non-perfusion variables obtained during vasodilator stress myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:390‐413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0441-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. van der Veen BJ, Kuperij N, Stokkel MP. Transient ischemic dilatation ratio derived from myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: What are we looking at? J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:207‐15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-009-9180-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Gadiraju R, Bommireddipalli S, Ahuja A, Klein E, DePuey G. Sustained supraventricular tachycardia resulting in a pattern of apparent “reverse transient ischemic dilatation” and an underestimated ejection fraction. J Nucl Cardiol 2010;17:153‐7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-009-9121-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Katz JS, Ruisi M, Giedd KN, Rachko M. Assessment of transient ischemic dilation (TID) ratio in gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) using regadenoson, a new agent for pharmacologic stress testing. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19:727‐34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-012-9559-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Golzar Y, Olusanya A, Pe N, et al. The significance of automatically measured transient ischemic dilation in identifying severe and extensive coronary artery disease in regadenoson, single-isotope technetium-99m myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22:526‐34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0087-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Lester D, El-Hajj S, Farag AA, et al. Prognostic value of transient ischemic dilation with regadenoson myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2016;23:1147‐55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-015-0272-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Hu LH, Sharir T, Miller RJH, et al. Upper reference limits of transient ischemic dilation ratio for different protocols on new-generation cadmium zinc telluride cameras: A report from REFINE SPECT registry. J Nucl Cardiol 2020;27:1180‐9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-019-01730-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Xu Y, Arsanjani R, Clond M, et al. Transient ischemic dilation for coronary artery disease in quantitative analysis of same-day sestamibi myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19:465‐73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-012-9527-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Nakazato R, Tamarappoo BK, Kang X, et al. Quantitative upright-supine high-speed SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease: Correlation with invasive coronary angiography. J Nucl Med 2010;51:1724‐31. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.110.078782.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Nakazato R, Slomka PJ, Fish M, et al. Quantitative high-efficiency cadmium-zinc-telluride SPECT with dedicated parallel-hole collimation system in obese patients: Results of a multi-center study. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22:266‐75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9984-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Duvall WL, Guma KA, Kamen J, et al. Reduction in occupational and patient radiation exposure from myocardial perfusion imaging: impact of stress-only imaging and high-efficiency SPECT camera technology. J Nucl Med 2013;54:1251‐7. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.112680.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Farag AA, Heo J. Simple method to correct for breast attenuation artifact. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22:583‐5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9989-y.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Bocher M, Balan A, Krausz Y, et al. Gamma camera-mounted anatomical X-ray tomography: Technology, system characteristics and first images. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27:619‐27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002590050555.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Suzuki Y, Slomka PJ, Wolak A, et al. Motion-frozen myocardial perfusion SPECT improves detection of coronary artery disease in obese patients. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1075‐9. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.050997.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Otaki Y, Betancur J, Sharir T, et al. 5-year prognostic value of quantitative versus visual MPI in subtle perfusion defects: Resudlts from REFINE SPECT. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2020;13:774‐85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2019.02.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Mahmarian JJ, Cerqueira MD, Iskandrian AE, et al. Regadenoson induces comparable left ventricular perfusion defects as adenosine: A quantitative analysis from the ADVANCE MPI 2 trial. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009;2:959‐68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.04.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Hage FG, Ghimire G, Lester D, et al. The prognostic value of regadenoson myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2015;22:1214‐21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-0050-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  122. Myers J, Prakash M, Froelicher V, Do D, Partington S, Atwood JE. Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for exercise testing. N Engl J Med 2002;346:793‐801. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa011858.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Bourque JM, Charlton GT, Holland BH, Belyea CM, Watson DD, Beller GA. Prognosis in patients achieving ≥10 METS on exercise stress testing: Was SPECT imaging useful? J Nucl Cardiol 2011;18:230‐7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-010-9323-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Ouellette ML, Löffler AI, Beller GA, Workman VK, Holland E, Bourque JM. Clinical characteristics, sex differences, and outcomes in patients with normal or near-normal coronary arteries, non-obstructive or obstructive coronary artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7(10). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.007965

  125. Christman MP, Bittencourt MS, Hulten E, et al. Yield of downstream tests after exercise treadmill testing: A prospective cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:1264‐74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.11.052.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  126. Bourque JM, Holland BH, Watson DD, Beller GA. Achieving an exercise workload of > or = 10 metabolic equivalents predicts a very low risk of inducible ischemia: Does myocardial perfusion imaging have a role? J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;54:538‐45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2009.04.042.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  127. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Delbeke D, et al. SNMMI/ASNC/SCCT guideline for cardiac SPECT/CT and PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med 2013;54(8):1485–507. doi:https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.112.105155

  128. Hendel RC, Ficaro EP, KA. W. Timeliness of reporting results of nuclear cardiology procedures. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:266.

  129. Tilkemeier PL, Cooke CD, Grossman GB, McCallister BD, RP. W. Standardized Reporting of radionuclide myocardial perfusion and function. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16(4):650.

  130. Gomez J, Doukky R, Germano G, Slomka P. New trends in quantitative nuclear cardiology methods. Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep 2018;11(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12410-018-9443-7

  131. Betancur J, Otaki Y, Motwani M, et al. Prognostic value of combined clinical and myocardial perfusion imaging data using machine learning. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018;11:1000‐9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2017.07.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  132. Gomez J, Doukky R. Artificial intelligence in nuclear cardiology. J Nucl Med 2019;60:1042‐3. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.222356.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Yadav N, Doukky R. Reporting nuclear cardiology studies: Is the cup half-full or half-empty? J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:995‐8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0748-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  134. Lette J, Tatum JL, Fraser S, et al. Safety of dipyridamole testing in 73,806 patients: The multicenter dipyridamole safety study. J Nucl Cardiol 1995;2:3‐17. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1071-3581(05)80003-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Cerqueira MD, Verani MS, Schwaiger M, Heo J, Iskandrian AS. Safety profile of adenosine stress perfusion imaging: Results from the Adenoscan Multicenter Trial Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;23:384‐9. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(94)90424-3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Belardinelli L, et al. Adenosine versus regadenoson comparative evaluation in myocardial perfusion imaging: Results of the ADVANCE phase 3 multicenter international trial. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:645‐58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2007.06.114.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Jetté M, Sidney K, Blümchen G. Metabolic equivalents (METS) in exercise testing, exercise prescription, and evaluation of functional capacity. Clin Cardiol 1990;13:555‐65. https://doi.org/10.1002/clc.4960130809.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. Snader CE, Marwick TH, Pashkow FJ, Harvey SA, Thomas JD, Lauer MS. Importance of estimated functional capacity as a predictor of all-cause mortality among patients referred for exercise thallium single-photon emission computed tomography: Report of 3,400 patients from a single center. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:641‐8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00217-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  139. Hachamovitch R, Rozanski A, Shaw LJ, 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(8):1012–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq500

  140. Kushner DC, Lucey LL, Radiology ACo. Diagnostic radiology reporting and communication: the ACR guideline. J Am Coll Radiol 2005;2(1):15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2004.08.005

  141. Wackers FJ. Intersocietal Commission for the Accreditation of Nuclear Medicine Laboratories (ICANL) position statement on standardization and optimization of nuclear cardiology reports. J Nucl Cardiol 2000;7:397‐400. https://doi.org/10.1067/mnc.2000.108576.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Trägårdh E, Hesse B, Knuuti J, et al. Reporting nuclear cardiology: A joint position paper by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;16:272‐9. https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeu304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The writing group acknowledges and thanks Niti R. Aggarwal, MD, FASNC for the creation of and contribution of Figure 1, “The 8 axes of the ASNC Quality Metrics for SPECT MPI.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Cardiology, Birmingham VA Medical Center, Birmingham, AL, USA

    Fadi G. Hage MD, MASNC

  2. Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 446 GSB, 520 19Th Street South, Birmingham, AL, 35294, USA

    Fadi G. Hage MD, MASNC

  3. Seymour, Paul and Gloria Milstein Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine and Department of Radiology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center and NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA

    Andrew J. Einstein MD, PhD, MASNC

  4. Heart and Vascular Institute, Henry Ford West Bloomfield Hospital, West Bloomfield, MI, USA

    Karthikeyan Ananthasubramaniam MD, FASNC

  5. Department of Medicine (Cardiology), University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Jamieson M. Bourque MD, MHS, FASNC

  6. Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Jamieson M. Bourque MD, MHS, FASNC

  7. Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies, Kansas City, MO, USA

    James Case PhD, MASNC

  8. Mount Sinai Morningside Hospital, New York, NY, USA

    E. Gordon DePuey MD, MASNC

  9. Bay Ridge Medical Imaging, Brooklyn, NY, USA

    E. Gordon DePuey MD, MASNC

  10. Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA

    Robert C. Hendel MD, MASNC

  11. Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY, USA

    Milena J. Henzlova MD, PhD, MASNC

  12. Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA

    Nishant R. Shah MD, MPH, FASNC & Brian G. Abbott MD, MASNC

  13. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA

    Wael Al Jaroudi MD, FASNC

  14. Department of Nuclear Medicine and Cardiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Nathan Better MD, FASNC

  15. Division of Cardiology, Cook County Health and Hospitals System, Chicago, IL, USA

    Rami Doukky MD, MASNC & Saurabh Malhotra MD, MPH, FASNC

  16. Heart and Vascular Institute, Hartford Hospital, Hartford, CT, USA

    W. Lane Duvall MD, FASNC

  17. GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA

    Robert Pagnanelli BSRT(R)(N), CNMT, NCT, FASNC

  18. Nuclear Medicine Department, Institute of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery, La Habana, Cuba

    Amalia Peix MD, PhD, FASNC

  19. Nuclear Medicine Department, Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK

    Eliana Reyes MD, PhD

  20. Virginia Heart, Falls Church, VA, USA

    Ibrahim M. Saeed MD

  21. INOVA Heart and Vascular Institute, Falls Church, VA, USA

    Ibrahim M. Saeed MD

  22. University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, USA

    Ibrahim M. Saeed MD

  23. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA

    Rupa M. Sanghani MD, FASNC

  24. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Piotr J. Slomka PhD, FASNC

  25. Saint Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA

    Randall C. Thompson MD, MASNC

  26. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, New England Heart and Vascular Institute, Manchester, NH, USA

    Vikas Veeranna MD

  27. Department of Medicine, University of Louisville Department of Medicine, Louisville, KY, USA

    Kim A. Williams Sr. MD, MASNC

  28. Malcom Randall VA Medical Center, Gainesville, FL, USA

    David E. Winchester MD, FASNC

  29. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Florida College of Medicine, Gainesville, FL, USA

    David E. Winchester MD, FASNC

Authors
  1. Fadi G. Hage MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrew J. Einstein MD, PhD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Karthikeyan Ananthasubramaniam MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jamieson M. Bourque MD, MHS, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. James Case PhD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. E. Gordon DePuey MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Robert C. Hendel MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Milena J. Henzlova MD, PhD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Nishant R. Shah MD, MPH, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Brian G. Abbott MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Wael Al Jaroudi MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Nathan Better MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Rami Doukky MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. W. Lane Duvall MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Saurabh Malhotra MD, MPH, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Robert Pagnanelli BSRT(R)(N), CNMT, NCT, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Amalia Peix MD, PhD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Eliana Reyes MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Ibrahim M. Saeed MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Rupa M. Sanghani MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Piotr J. Slomka PhD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Randall C. Thompson MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Vikas Veeranna MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Kim A. Williams Sr. MD, MASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  25. David E. Winchester MD, FASNC
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fadi G. Hage MD, MASNC.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

Dr. Fadi G. Hage has received grant support from GE Healthcare and Idorsia Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Andrew J. Einstein has received speaker fees from Ionetix; has received consulting fees from W. L. Gore & Associates; has received authorship fees from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare – UpToDate; and has received grants or grants pending to his institution from Attralus, Canon Medical Systems, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, and W. L. Gore & Associates. Dr. Nathan Better serves as a consultant to Pfizer. Dr. Jamieson Bourque serves as a consultant to GE Healthcare and Pfizer and holds stock in Locus Health. James A. Case holds intellectual property rights in Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies; serves as a consultant to AstraZeneca; has received grant support from Bracco Diagnostics and General Electric; serves on the advisory board of General Electric; has stock interest in Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies; and is a salaried employee of Cardiovascular Imaging Technologies. Dr. W. Lane Duvall serves as a consultant to GE Healthcare and has received grant support from GE Healthcare. Dr. Saurabh Malhotra serves as a consultant to Alnylam and serves on the speakers’ bureau for Alnylam and Pfizer. Robert Pagnanelli serves on the speakers’ bureau for Astellas Pharma, receives honoraria from Pfizer, and is a salaried employee of GE Healthcare. Dr. Eliana Reyes has received one-off contribution to an educational activity sponsored by GE Healthcare. Dr. Ibrahim M. Saeed serves as a consultant to AstraZeneca and serves on the speakers’ bureau for Pfizer. Dr. Nishant R. Shah has received grant support from Pfizer and has stock interest in General Electric. Piotr J. Slomka has received grant support from the NIH, Siemens Medical Systems, and Amazon Web Services and receives a share of royalties from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Victoria Anderson (ASNC staff) has stock interest in Abbott Labs and AbbVie Inc. The following contributors have nothing relevant to disclose: Brian G. Abbott, MD, MASNC; Wael AlJaroudi, MD, FASNC; E. Gordon DePuey, MD, MASNC; Rami Doukky, MD, MASNC; Robert C. Hendel, MD, MASNC; Milena J. Henzlova, MD, PhD; Amalia Peix, MD, PhD, FASNC; Rupa M. Sanghani, MD, FASNC; Randall C. Thompson, MD, MASNC; Vikas Veeranna, MD; and Kim A. Williams, MD, MASNC; David E. Winchester, MD, FASNC. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Department of Veterans Affairs or the United States Government.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (MP4 481 kb)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 61 kb)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hage, F.G., Einstein, A.J., Ananthasubramaniam, K. et al. Quality metrics for single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging: an ASNC information statement. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 30, 864–907 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-022-03162-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-022-03162-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation