Display options
Cite
Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10(16):1-80
(2010). Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis. Ontario health technology assessment series, 10(16), 1-80.
"Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis." Ontario health technology assessment series vol. 10,16 (2010): 1-80.
Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10(16):1-80. Epub 2010 Jul 01. PMID: 23074393; PMCID: PMC3377573.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2010;10(16):1-80. Epub 2010 Jul 01.

Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: an evidence-based analysis.

Ontario health technology assessment series

[No authors listed]

PMID: 23074393 PMCID: PMC3377573

Abstract

UNLABELLED: In July 2009, the Medical Advisory Secretariat (MAS) began work on Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging Technologies for the Assessment of Myocardial Viability, an evidence-based review of the literature surrounding different cardiac imaging modalities to ensure that appropriate technologies are accessed by patients undergoing viability assessment. This project came about when the Health Services Branch at the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care asked MAS to provide an evidentiary platform on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of non-invasive cardiac imaging modalities.After an initial review of the strategy and consultation with experts, MAS identified five key non-invasive cardiac imaging technologies that can be used for the assessment of myocardial viability: positron emission tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, dobutamine echocardiography, and dobutamine echocardiography with contrast, and single photon emission computed tomography.A 2005 review conducted by MAS determined that positron emission tomography was more sensitivity than dobutamine echocardiography and single photon emission tomography and dominated the other imaging modalities from a cost-effective standpoint. However, there was inadequate evidence to compare positron emission tomography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Thus, this report focuses on this comparison only. For both technologies, an economic analysis was also completed.The Non-Invasive Cardiac Imaging Technologies for the Assessment of Myocardial Viability is made up of the following reports, which can be publicly accessed at the MAS website at: www.health.gov.on.ca/mas or at www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/program/mas/mas_about.htmlPOSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MYOCARDIAL VIABILITY: An Evidence-Based AnalysisMAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF MYOCARDIAL VIABILITY: An Evidence-Based Analysis

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this analysis is to assess the effectiveness and safety of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging using F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) for the assessment of myocardial viability. To evaluate the effectiveness of FDG PET viability imaging, the following outcomes are examined: the diagnostic accuracy of FDG PET for predicting functional recovery;the impact of PET viability imaging on prognosis (mortality and other patient outcomes); andthe contribution of PET viability imaging to treatment decision making and subsequent patient outcomes.

CLINICAL NEED: CONDITION AND TARGET POPULATION LEFT VENTRICULAR SYSTOLIC DYSFUNCTION AND HEART FAILURE: Heart failure is a complex syndrome characterized by the heart's inability to maintain adequate blood circulation through the body leading to multiorgan abnormalities and, eventually, death. Patients with heart failure experience poor functional capacity, decreased quality of life, and increased risk of morbidity and mortality. In 2005, more than 71,000 Canadians died from cardiovascular disease, of which, 54% were due to ischemic heart disease. Left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction due to coronary artery disease (CAD) is the primary cause of heart failure accounting for more than 70% of cases. The prevalence of heart failure was estimated at one percent of the Canadian population in 1989. Since then, the increase in the older population has undoubtedly resulted in a substantial increase in cases. Heart failure is associated with a poor prognosis: one-year mortality rates were 32.9% and 31.1% for men and women, respectively in Ontario between 1996 and 1997.

TREATMENT OPTIONS: IN GENERAL, THERE ARE THREE OPTIONS FOR THE TREATMENT OF HEART FAILURE: medical treatment, heart transplantation, and revascularization for those with CAD as the underlying cause. Concerning medical treatment, despite recent advances, mortality remains high among treated patients, while, heart transplantation is affected by the limited availability of donor hearts and consequently has long waiting lists. The third option, revascularization, is used to restore the flow of blood to the heart via coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or through minimally invasive percutaneous coronary interventions (balloon angioplasty and stenting). Both methods, however, are associated with important perioperative risks including mortality, so it is essential to properly select patients for this procedure.

MYOCARDIAL VIABILITY: Left ventricular dysfunction may be permanent if a myocardial scar is formed, or it may be reversible after revascularization. Reversible LV dysfunction occurs when the myocardium is viable but dysfunctional (reduced contractility). Since only patients with dysfunctional but viable myocardium benefit from revascularization, the identification and quantification of the extent of myocardial viability is an important part of the work-up of patients with heart failure when determining the most appropriate treatment path. Various non-invasive cardiac imaging modalities can be used to assess patients in whom determination of viability is an important clinical issue, specifically: dobutamine echocardiography (echo),stress echo with contrast,SPECT using either technetium or thallium,cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cardiac MRI), andpositron emission tomography (PET).

DOBUTAMINE ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY: Stress echocardiography can be used to detect viable myocardium. During the infusion of low dose dobutamine (5 - 10 μg/kg/min), an improvement of contractility in hypokinetic and akentic segments is indicative of the presence of viable myocardium. Alternatively, a low-high dose dobutamine protocol can be used in which a biphasic response characterized by improved contractile function during the low-dose infusion followed by a deterioration in contractility due to stress induced ischemia during the high dose dobutamine infusion (dobutamine dose up to 40 ug/kg/min) represents viable tissue. Newer techniques including echocardiography using contrast agents, harmonic imaging, and power doppler imaging may help to improve the diagnostic accuracy of echocardiographic assessment of myocardial viability.

STRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY WITH CONTRAST: Intravenous contrast agents, which are high molecular weight inert gas microbubbles that act like red blood cells in the vascular space, can be used during echocardiography to assess myocardial viability. These agents allow for the assessment of myocardial blood flow (perfusion) and contractile function (as described above), as well as the simultaneous assessment of perfusion to make it possible to distinguish between stunned and hibernating myocardium. SPECT: SPECT can be performed using thallium-201 (Tl-201), a potassium analogue, or technetium-99 m labelled tracers. When Tl-201 is injected intravenously into a patient, it is taken up by the myocardial cells through regional perfusion, and Tl-201 is retained in the cell due to sodium/potassium ATPase pumps in the myocyte membrane. The stress-redistribution-reinjection protocol involves three sets of images. The first two image sets (taken immediately after stress and then three to four hours after stress) identify perfusion defects that may represent scar tissue or viable tissue that is severely hypoperfused. The third set of images is taken a few minutes after the re-injection of Tl-201 and after the second set of images is completed. These re-injection images identify viable tissue if the defects exhibit significant fill-in (> 10% increase in tracer uptake) on the re-injection images. The other common Tl-201 viability imaging protocol, rest-redistribution, involves SPECT imaging performed at rest five minutes after Tl-201 is injected and again three to four hours later. Viable tissue is identified if the delayed images exhibit significant fill-in of defects identified in the initial scans (> 10% increase in uptake) or if defects are fixed but the tracer activity is greater than 50%. There are two technetium-99 m tracers: sestamibi (MIBI) and tetrofosmin. The uptake and retention of these tracers is dependent on regional perfusion and the integrity of cellular membranes. Viability is assessed using one set of images at rest and is defined by segments with tracer activity greater than 50%.

CARDIAC MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cardiac MRI) is a non-invasive, x-ray free technique that uses a powerful magnetic field, radio frequency pulses, and a computer to produce detailed images of the structure and function of the heart. Two types of cardiac MRI are used to assess myocardial viability: dobutamine stress magnetic resonance imaging (DSMR) and delayed contrast-enhanced cardiac MRI (DE-MRI). DE-MRI, the most commonly used technique in Ontario, uses gadolinium-based contrast agents to define the transmural extent of scar, which can be visualized based on the intensity of the image. Hyper-enhanced regions correspond to irreversibly damaged myocardium. As the extent of hyper-enhancement increases, the amount of scar increases, so there is a lower the likelihood of functional recovery.

CARDIAC POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY: Positron emission tomography (PET) is a nuclear medicine technique used to image tissues based on the distinct ways in which normal and abnormal tissues metabolize positron-emitting radionuclides. Radionuclides are radioactive analogs of common physiological substrates such as sugars, amino acids, and free fatty acids that are used by the body. The only licensed radionuclide used in PET imaging for viability assessment is F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). During a PET scan, the radionuclides are injected into the body and as they decay, they emit positively charged particles (positrons) that travel several millimetres into tissue and collide with orbiting electrons. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)

References

  1. Heart. 2004 Aug;90 Suppl 5:v26-33 - PubMed
  2. Jpn Circ J. 2001 Mar;65(3):177-81 - PubMed
  3. Hell J Nucl Med. 2005 Sep-Dec;8(3):140-4 - PubMed
  4. Radiat Med. 1999 May-Jun;17(3):205-10 - PubMed
  5. Eur Heart J. 2006 Apr;27(7):846-53 - PubMed
  6. Cardiol Clin. 2009 May;27(2):237-55, Table of Contents - PubMed
  7. Heart Lung Circ. 2008 Jun;17(3):173-85 - PubMed
  8. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):210-9 - PubMed
  9. J Nucl Med. 1995 Sep;36(9):1543-52 - PubMed
  10. Heart. 1999 Aug;82(2):210-6 - PubMed
  11. J Nucl Med. 2001 Aug;42(8):1166-73 - PubMed
  12. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009 Sep;2(9):1060-8 - PubMed
  13. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Oct 4;46(7):1264-9 - PubMed
  14. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992 Sep;20(3):559-65 - PubMed
  15. Am J Cardiol. 2001 May 1;87(9):1096-9, A6 - PubMed
  16. Am J Cardiol. 1997 Apr 15;79(8):1092-5 - PubMed
  17. Heart. 2005 Jan;91(1):111-7 - PubMed
  18. Can J Cardiol. 2005 Dec;21(14):1265-71 - PubMed
  19. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Mar;33(3):750-8 - PubMed
  20. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Apr;33(5):1328-37 - PubMed
  21. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2001 Feb;26(2):147-86 - PubMed
  22. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006 Jun;33(6):716-23 - PubMed
  23. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997 Dec;30(7):1693-700 - PubMed
  24. Heart Fail Rev. 2006 Jun;11(2):125-34 - PubMed
  25. Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12 - PubMed
  26. Circulation. 1996 Aug 15;94(4):651-9 - PubMed
  27. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997 Jan;29(1):62-8 - PubMed
  28. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1994 Fall;10(4):714-5 - PubMed
  29. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Mar;49(1):81-96 - PubMed
  30. Semin Roentgenol. 2008 Jul;43(3):193-203 - PubMed
  31. Circulation. 2007 Mar 20;115(11):1464-80 - PubMed
  32. Am Heart J. 2000 Dec;140(6):928-36 - PubMed
  33. Can J Cardiol. 2007 Feb;23(2):107-19 - PubMed
  34. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Jun;29(6):721-7 - PubMed
  35. Eur Heart J. 2004 May;25(10):815-36 - PubMed
  36. N Engl J Med. 2000 Nov 16;343(20):1445-53 - PubMed
  37. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Jul;28(1):60-9 - PubMed
  38. J Nucl Cardiol. 2003 Jan-Feb;10(1):34-45 - PubMed
  39. Eur Heart J. 2001 Sep;22(18):1691-701 - PubMed
  40. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1992;6(9):479-84 - PubMed
  41. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007 Feb 15;7:10 - PubMed
  42. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Oct;28(4):948-58 - PubMed
  43. Am J Cardiol. 1992 Apr 1;69(9):854-9 - PubMed
  44. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001 Jan;37(1):81-8 - PubMed
  45. Am J Cardiol. 2005 Jul 1;96(1):2-8 - PubMed
  46. Nucl Med Commun. 2008 May;29(5):448-54 - PubMed
  47. Echocardiography. 2005 Feb;22(2):165-77 - PubMed
  48. BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490 - PubMed
  49. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Dec;59(12):1331-2; author reply 1332-3 - PubMed
  50. Magn Reson Imaging. 2004 Feb;22(2):229-36 - PubMed
  51. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2007 Jul;32(7):375-410 - PubMed
  52. Cardiology. 2002;98(4):202-9 - PubMed
  53. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006 Jan-Feb;13(1):19-23 - PubMed
  54. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 Nov 13;50(20):2002-12 - PubMed
  55. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004 Mar;31(3):355-61 - PubMed
  56. J Nucl Med. 1997 May;38(5):742-8 - PubMed
  57. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003 Nov 10;3:25 - PubMed
  58. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2006 May;86(5):337-45 - PubMed
  59. Circulation. 1994 Dec;90(6):2687-94 - PubMed
  60. Heart. 1998 Mar;79(3):281-8 - PubMed
  61. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1998 Dec;116(6):997-1004 - PubMed

Publication Types