Practice Test #1: Difficulty Level—Easy



  1. 1.
    The first-pass myocardial extraction fraction of Tl-201 is in the range of:
    1. A.

      95 %

    2. B.

      85 %

    3. C.

      75 %

    4. D.

      65 %

  2. 2.
    Tl-201 myocardial imaging, when compared with Tc-99 m-based tracers:
    1. A.

      Creates less soft tissue attenuation

    2. B.

      Produces improved image quality

    3. C.

      Produces improved image contrast

    4. D.

      Creates less liver and gut activity

  3. 3.
    On the SPECT 17-segment model, myocardial perfusion is graded within each segment on a scale of:
    1. A.


    2. B.


    3. C.


    4. D.


  4. 4.
    The physical half-life of O-15 is:
    1. A.

      63 s

    2. B.

      124 s

    3. C.

      248 s

    4. D.

      496 s

  5. 5.
    An immune inflammatory process, which over decades, results in the heart’s arterial narrowing, is called:
    1. A.


    2. B.

      Coronary artery disease

    3. C.

      Myocardial infarction

    4. D.

      Unstable angina

  6. 6.
    Substantial tracer uptake observed throughout the lung fields after stress, that is not present at rest, indicates a diagnosis of:
    1. A.

      Bronchial asthma

    2. B.

      Cardiac arrhythmia

    3. C.

      Lung carcinoma

    4. D.

      Severe ischemia

  7. 7.
    An indirect coronary vasodilator that works by...


Myocardial Perfusion Myocardial Blood Flow Coronary Flow Reserve Heart Rate Recovery Gated Single Photon Emission Compute Tomography 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References and Suggested Readings

  1. Adam A, Dixon KA, Grainger GR, Allison JD. Adam: Grainger & Allison's diagnostic radiology. 5th ed. St. Louis, MO: Churchill Livingstone; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. Akinpelu, D. ed. Treadmill stress testing. Accessed 11 Oct 2012.
  3. Alaeddini J. Angina pectoris. Accessed 24 July 2012
  4. Baggish LA, Boucher AC. Radiopharmaceutical agents for myocardial perfusion imaging. Circulation. 2008;118:1668–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Banerjee A, Newman DR, Van den Bruel A, Heneghan C. Diagnostic accuracy of exercise stress testing for coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(5):477–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bengel MF, Higuchi T, et al. Cardiac positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonow RO. Myocardial viability and prognosis in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:1159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bonow RO, Mann LD, Zipes PD, et al. Braunwald’s heart disease – a textbook of cardiovascular medicine. 9th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2011.Google Scholar
  10. Burrell S, MacDonald A. Artifacts and pitfalls in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med Technol. 2006;34:193–211.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cerqueira MD, Allman KC, Ficaro EP, et al. Recommendations for reducing radiation exposure in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:709.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christian PE, Bernier DR, Langan JK. Nuclear medicine and PET: technology and techniques. 5th ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 2004.Google Scholar
  13. Cleland JG, Pennell DJ, Ray SG, et al. Myocardial viability as a determinant of the ejection fraction response to carvedilol in patients with heart failure (CHRISTMAS trial): randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;362:14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diabetes and Stress Tests. Accessed June 03 2012.
  15. Dilsizian V, Narula J, Braunwald E, editors. Atlas of nuclear cardiology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Current Medicine; 2009.Google Scholar
  16. Early PJ, Sodee BD. Principles and practice of nuclear medicine. 2nd ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1995.Google Scholar
  17. Eisner RL, Nowak DJ, Pettigrew R, et al. Fundamentals of 180 degree acquisition and reconstruction in SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med. 1986;27:1717–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ellestad MH. Stress testing: principles and practice. 5th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  19. Erlandsson K, Kacperski K, van Gramberg D, Hutton BF. Performance evaluation of D-SPECT: a novel SPECT system for nuclear cardiology. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54:2635.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fallavollita JA, Luisi Jr AJ, Yun E, Dekemp RA, Canty Jr JM. An abbreviated hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp results in similar myocardial glucose utilization in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:637–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ficaro EP, Hansen CL, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology: Imaging Guidelines for Nuclear Cardiology Procedures. Available at: Complete070709.pdf. Accessed 22 May 2012.
  22. Fuster V, O’Rourke RA, Walsh RA, Wilson P. Hurst’s the heart. 12th ed. New York: McGraw Hill; 2007.Google Scholar
  23. Germano G. Technical aspects of myocardial SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1499–507.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Germano G, Berman DS, editors. Clinical gated cardiac SPECT. Armonk, NY: Blackwell Futura; 2006.Google Scholar
  25. Germano G, Kiat H, Kavanagh PB, et al. Automatic quantification of ejection fraction from gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1995;36(11):2130–47.Google Scholar
  26. Ghosh N, Rimoldi EO, Beanlands SBR, et al. Assessment of myocardial ischaemia and viability: role of positron emission tomography. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:2984–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gibbons JR. Imaging techniques. Myocardial perfusion imaging. Heart. 2000;83:355–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gibbons RJ, Miller TD, Christian TF. Infarct size measured by single photon emission computed tomographic imaging with 99mTc-sestamibi: a measure of the efficacy of therapy in acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2000;101:101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goldberger LA. Clinical electrocardiography: a simplified approach. 7th ed. St Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar
  30. Grainger GR, Allison JD, Adam A, Dixon KA. Grainger & Allison’s diagnostic radiology: a textbook of medical imaging. 4th ed. London: Harcourt Publishers; 2001.Google Scholar
  31. Guyton A, Hall EJ. Textbook of medical physiology. 11th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar
  32. Heller VG, Lundbye BJ, Kapetanopoulos A. Vasodilator stress radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging: testing methodologies and safety.
  33. Heller G, Calnon D, Dorbala S. Recent advances in cardiac PET and PET/CT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16(6):962–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hendel CR, et al. ACCF/ASNC/ACR/AHA/ASE/SCCT/SCMR/SNM 2009 appropriate use criteria for cardiac radionuclide imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(23):2201–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Henzlova JM, Cerqueira DM, Christopher L, HC H, et al. ASNC imaging guidelines for nuclear cardiology procedures. Stress protocols and tracers. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:646–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hill J, Timmis A. ABC of clinical electrocardiography. Exercise tolerance testing.
  37. Ho BV, Reddy PG. Cardiovascular imaging. 1st ed. St Louis, MO: Saunders; 2011.Google Scholar
  38. Husain SS. Myocardial perfusion imaging protocols: is there an ideal protocol? J Nucl Med Technol. 2007;35:3–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Iskandrian EA, Garcia VE. Atlas of nuclear cardiology: imaging companion to Braunwald’s heart disease. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2012.Google Scholar
  40. Iskandrian AE, Verani MS, et al. Nuclear cardiac imaging and principles applications. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.Google Scholar
  41. Karacalioglu OA, Jata B, Kilic S, et al. A physiologic approach to decreasing upward creep of the heart during myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med Technol. 2006;34:215–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Khalil MM, editor. Basic sciences of nuclear medicine. Berlin: Springer; 2011.Google Scholar
  43. Klabunde ER. Cardiovascular physiology concepts.
  44. Koller D. Assessing diagnostic performance in nuclear cardiology. J Nucl Cardiol. 2002;9:114–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kowalczyk N, Donnett AK. Integrated patient care for the imaging professional. 1st ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1996.Google Scholar
  46. Lin CE, Alavi A. PET and PET/CT. A clinical guide. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Thieme; 2009.Google Scholar
  47. MacDonald A, Burrell AS. Infrequently performed studies in nuclear medicine: part 1. J Nucl Med Technol. 2008;36:132–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mark DB, Lauer MS. Exercise capacity: the prognostic variable that doesn’t get enough respect. Circulation. 2003;108:1534.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Definition of Bruce protocol. = 30741
  50. Mettler FA, Guiberteau MJ. Essentials of nuclear medicine imaging. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier; 2006.Google Scholar
  51. Munro HB. Statistical methods for health care research. 5th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.Google Scholar
  52. Nakajima K, Higuchi T, Taki J, Kwano M, Tonami N. Accuracy of ventricular volume and ejection fraction measured by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: comparison of 4 software programs. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1571–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Nichols K, DePuey EG, Rozanski A. First-pass radionuclide angiocardiography with single-crystal gamma cameras. J Nucl Cardiol. 1997;4:61–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. O’Connor MK, Kemp BJ. Single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography: basic instrumentation and innovations. Semin Nucl Med. 2006;36:258266.Google Scholar
  55. Paul KA, Nabi AH. Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: basic principles. Technical aspects, and clinical applications. J Nucl Med Technol. 2004;32:179–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Ropers D, Moshage W, Daniel WG, Jessl J, Gottwik M, Achenbach S. Visualization of coronary artery anomalies and their anatomic course by contrast-enhanced electron beam tomography and three-dimensional reconstruction. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:193–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Rubidium Rb-82 Generator. Accessed Sept 21 2012.Google Scholar
  58. Saha GB. Fundamentals of nuclear pharmacy. 5th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2004.Google Scholar
  59. Schelbert RH. Quantification of myocardial blood flow: what is the clinical role? Cardiol Clin. 2009;27:277–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Schinkel FLA, Poldermans D, Elhendy A, Bax JJ. Assessment of myocardial viability in patients with heart failure. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1135–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schlosser T, Pagonidis K, Herborn UC, et al. Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT: Results. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;184(3):765–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sharp FP, Gemmell GH, Murray DA, editors. Practical nuclear medicine. 3rd ed. London: Springer; 2005.Google Scholar
  63. Smuclovisky C. Coronary artery CTA. A case based atlas. Berlin: Springer; 2009.Google Scholar
  64. SNM. Society of Nuclear Medicine Procedure Guideline for Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.
  65. Statkiewicz-Sherer MA, Ritenour ER, Visconti PJ. Radiation protection in medical radiography. 6th ed. Maryland Heights, MO: Mosby; 2011.Google Scholar
  66. Strauss WH, Grewal KR, Pandit-Taskar N. Molecular imaging in nuclear cardiology. Semin in Nucl Med. 2004;XXXIV(1):47–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Takalkar A, Agarwal A, Adams S, et al. Cardiac Assessment with PET. PET Clin. 2011;6: 313–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. The Society of Nuclear Medicine, the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology. Standardization of cardiac tomographic imaging. J Nucl Med. 1992;33(7):1434–5.Google Scholar
  69. Thomas GS, Prill NV, Majmundar H, Fabrizi RR, Thomas JJ, Hayashida C, et al. Treadmill exercise during adenosine infusion is safe, results in fever adverse reactions, and improves myocardial perfusion imagine quality. J Nucl Cardiol. 2000;7:439–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Udelson JE, Bonow RO, Dilsizian V. The historical and conceptual evolution of radionuclide assessment of myocardial viability. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004a;11:318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Udelson JE, Heller GV, Wackers FJ, et al. A randomized, controlled dose-ranging study of the selective adenosine A2A receptor agonist binodenoson for pharmacologic stress as an adjunct to myocardial perfusion imaging. Circulation. 2004b;109:457.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Viagra. =google&HBX_PK=s_viagra&o=23121503|166374793|0&skwid=43100000390696855.Google Scholar
  73. Weiner AD. Stress testing to determine prognosis and management of patients with known or suspected coronary heart disease.
  74. Wheat MJ, Currie MG. Rest versus Stress Ejection Fraction on Gated Myocardial Perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med Technol. 2005;33:218–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Williams MA, Haskell WL, Ades P, et al. Resistance exercise in individuals with and without cardiovascular disease: 2007 update. A Scientific Statement from the American Heart Association Council on Clinical Cardiology and Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism. Circulation. 2007;116:572.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Williams KA, Hill KA, Sheridan CM. Noncardiac findings on dual-isotope myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2003;10:395–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Yoshinaga K, Katoh C, Noriyasu K, et al. Reduction of coronary flow reserve in areas with and without ischemia on stress perfusion imaging in patients with coronary artery disease: A study using oxygen 15-labeled water PET. J Nucl Cardiol. 2003;10:275–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zaret BL, Beller GA. Clinical nuclear cardiology: state of the art and future directions. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby; 2005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of RadiologyStaff Radiologist, Presence Resurrection Medical CenterChicago, Cook CountyUSA

Personalised recommendations