Considerations for Stress Testing Performed in Conjunction with Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.

For myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), the best test to evaluate hemodynamic changes during stress is an exercise treadmill test. It provides independent prognostic value, including evaluation of total exercise time, performance, and capacity; heart rate response during exercise, with ischemia, and in recovery; blood pressure response; myocardial oxygen demand; and assessment of symptoms. Combining these exercise data with perfusion imaging provides the best prognostic value and risk stratification for patients. Although exercise stress testing accompanied by MPI is preferential, it is not always possible since an increasing number of patients cannot exercise to a maximal (symptom-limited) level. Further, there is much evidence in the literature demonstrating a suboptimal, non-symptom-limited (not achieving at least 4-6 min or <85% of maximum predicted heart rate) exercise test performed as part of an MPI study may result in a false-negative outcome. Therefore, pharmacologic stress agents provide an excellent alternative for those patients who cannot achieve an adequate heart rate response or adequately perform physical exercise. This article focuses on considerations for performing stress (exercise and pharmacologic) testing in conjunction with MPI. It is meant to provide a basic overview of the principles of exercise stress testing; discuss the indications, contraindications, patient preparation, and protocols for exercise stress testing; discuss the contraindications, administration protocols, and side effects for vasodilator (adenosine, dipyridamole, and regadenoson) stress testing; and discuss the contraindications, administration protocols, and side effects for dobutamine stress testing.

The Importance of Quality in Ventilation-Perfusion Imaging.

As the health care environment continues to change and morph into a system focusing on increased quality and evidence-based outcomes, nuclear medicine technologists must be reminded that they play a critical role in achieving high-quality, interpretable images used to drive patient care, treatment, and best possible outcomes. A survey performed by the Quality Committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Technologist Section demonstrated that a clear knowledge gap exists among technologists regarding their understanding of quality, how it is measured, and how it should be achieved by all practicing technologists regardless of role and education level. Understanding of these areas within health care, in conjunction with the growing emphasis on evidence-based outcomes, quality measures, and patient satisfaction, will ultimately elevate the role of nuclear medicine technologists today and into the future. The nuclear medicine role now requires technologists to demonstrate patient assessment skills, practice safety procedures with regard to staff and patients, provide patient education and instruction, and provide physicians with information to assist with the interpretation and outcome of the study. In addition, the technologist must be able to evaluate images by performing technical analysis, knowing the demonstrated anatomy and pathophysiology, and assessing overall quality. Technologists must also be able to triage and understand the disease processes being evaluated and how nuclear medicine diagnostic studies may drive care and treatment. Therefore, it is imperative that nuclear medicine technologists understand their role in the achievement of a high-quality, interpretable study by applying quality principles and understanding and using imaging techniques beyond just basic protocols for every type of disease or system being imaged. This article focuses on quality considerations related to ventilation-perfusion imaging. It provides insight on appropriate imaging techniques and protocols, true imaging variants and tracer distributions versus artifacts that may result in a lower-quality or misinterpreted study, and the use of SPECT and SPECT/CT as an alternative providing a high-quality, interpretable study with better diagnostic accuracy and fewer nondiagnostic procedures than historical planar imaging.

Correction to: Clinical Quantification of Myocardial Blood Flow Using PET: Joint Position Paper of the SNMMI Cardiovascular Council and the ASNC.

The above position statement originally published containing errors in the author metadata; specifically, the Expert Content Reviewers-Andrew Einstein, Raymond Russell and James R. Corbett-were tagged as full authors of the paper. The article metadata has now been corrected to remove Drs. Einstein, Russell and Corbett from the author line, and the PubMed record has been updated accordingly.

Impact of Nuclear Laboratory Personnel Credentials & Continuing Education on Nuclear Cardiology Laboratory Quality Operations.

Background/Objectives: The specific credentials and continuing education (CME/CE) of nuclear cardiology laboratory medical and technical staff are important factors in the delivery of quality imaging services that have not been systematically evaluated. Methods: Nuclear cardiology accreditation application data from the Intersocietal Accreditation Commission (IAC) was used to characterize facilities performing myocardial perfusion imaging by setting, size, previous accreditation and credentials of the medical and technical staff. Credentials and CME/CE were compared against initial accreditation decisions (grant or delay) using multivariable logistic regression. Results: Complete data were available for 1913 nuclear cardiology laboratories from 2011-2014. Laboratories with initial positive accreditation decisions had a greater prevalence of Certification Board in Nuclear Cardiology (CBNC) certified medical directors and specialty credentialed technical directors. Certification and credentials of the medical and technical directors, respectively, staff CME/CE compliance, and assistance of a consultant with the application were positively associated with accreditation decisions. Conclusion: Nuclear cardiology laboratories directed by CBNC-certified physicians and NCT- or PET-credentialed technologists were less likely to receive delay decisions for MPI. CME/CE compliance of both the medical and technical directors was associated with accreditation decision. Medical and technical directors' years of experience were not associated with accreditation decision.

Nuclear Medicine Technologists' Perception and Current Assessment of Quality: A Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Technologist Section Survey.

In 2015, the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Technologist Section (SNMMI-TS) launched a multiyear quality initiative to help prepare the technologist workforce for an evidence-based health-care delivery system that focuses on quality. To best implement the quality strategy, the SNMMI-TS first surveyed technologists to ascertain their perception of quality and current measurement of quality indicators. Methods: An internet survey was sent to 27,989 e-mail contacts. Questions related to demographic data, perceptions of quality, quality measurement, and opinions on the minimum level of education are discussed in this article. Results: A total of 4,007 (14.3%) responses were received. When asked to list 3 words or phrases that represent quality, there were a plethora of different responses. The top 3 responses were image quality, quality control, and technologist education or competency. Surveying patient satisfaction was the most common quality measure (80.9%), followed by evaluation of image quality (78.2%). Evaluation of image quality (90.3%) and equipment functionality (89.4%) were considered the most effective measures. Technologists' differentiation between quality, quality improvement, quality control, quality assurance, and quality assessment seemed ambiguous. Respondents were confident in their ability to assess and improve quality at their workplace (91.9%) and agreed their colleagues were committed to delivering quality work. Of note, 70.7% of respondents believed that quality is directly related to the technologist's level of education. Correspondingly, respondents felt there should be a minimum level of education (99.5%) and that certification or registry should be required (74.4%). Most respondents (59.6%) felt that a Bachelor's degree should be the minimum level of education, followed by an Associate's degree (40.4%). Conclusion: To best help nuclear medicine technologists provide quality care, the SNMMI-TS queried technologists to discern perceptions of quality in nuclear medicine. The results show that technologists believe image quality and quality control are the most important determinants. Most respondents felt that quality is directly related to the level of education of the technologist acquiring the scan. However, the responses obtained also demonstrated variation in perception of what represents quality. The SNMMI-TS can use the results of the study as a benchmark of current technologists' knowledge and performance of quality measures and target educational programs to improve the quality of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging.

Usefulness of electrocardiographic-gated stress technetium-99m sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography to differentiate ischemic from nonischemic cardiomyopathy.

The noninvasive differentiation between ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy is frequently difficult. We examined the clinical value of stress electrocardiographic gated (ECG-gated) single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to identify ischemic cardiomyopathy and detect coronary artery disease (CAD) in 164 patients without known CAD, ejection fraction < or =40% by ECG-gated SPECT, and subsequent coronary angiography. Summed stress, rest, and difference scores were measured from the SPECT studies, and regional wall motion variance was calculated from the ECG-gated images. Sensitivity and 95% confidence intervals for the diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy and for detection of any CAD (>50% diameter stenosis) were estimated using previously defined cutoffs for summed stress score and regional wall motion variance. For the diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy, sensitivity of stress SPECT (summed stress score >8) was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 78 to 95), with a specificity of 63% (95% CI 60 to 82). The addition of wall motion information (summed stress score >8 or regional wall motion variance >0.114) increased sensitivity to 88% (95% CI 80 to 96) and decreased specificity to 45% (95% CI 35 to 55). If reversibility was also taken into account (summed stress score >8, regional wall motion variance >0.114, or summed difference score >0), sensitivity further increased to 94% (95% CI 88 to 100) and specificity decreased to 32% (95% CI 23 to 41). For detection of any CAD, the combined approach using stress perfusion, reversibility, and region of wall motion had a sensitivity of 94% (95% CI 89 to 99) and a specificity of 45% (95% CI 35 to 57). Therefore, ECG-gated SPECT is very sensitive for detection of ischemic cardiomyopathy and CAD among patients with moderate to severe systolic dysfunction.

Visual assessment of left ventricular perfusion and function with electrocardiography-gated SPECT has high intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility among experienced nuclear cardiologists and cardiology trainees.

BACKGROUND: Stress electrocardiography (ECG)-gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for assessment of left ventricular perfusion and function improves the confidence of interpretation and enhances specificity for detection of coronary artery disease. The reproducibility of visual interpretation of ECG-gated SPECT images and the significance of training and experience have not been reported previously in a large series of consecutive patients. We evaluated both intraobserver and interobserver agreement of interpretation of ECG-gated SPECT images among 3 cardiology trainees and 3 experienced nuclear cardiologists from 3 institutions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Three nuclear cardiologists and 3 cardiology trainees who had fulfilled American College of Cardiology/American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Core Cardiology Training Symposium (ACC/ASNC COCATS) guidelines for level II training in nuclear cardiology independently evaluated 106 consecutive technetium 99m sestamibi SPECT images with ECG gating of either the stress or rest images. All cases were interpreted blindly, twice in random sequence, without clinical data. We assessed intraobserver and interobserver agreement for myocardial perfusion, left ventricular regional and global systolic function, and overall clinical impression, by means of percent agreement and Cohen's kappa statistic. Intraobserver agreement was good (82%-92%, kappa = 0.54-0.84) for assessment of myocardial perfusion, systolic function, and overall impression. Interobserver agreement was also good, ranging from 65% to 90% (kappa = 0.32-0.76), with better agreement found for assessment of function (77%-85%, kappa = 0.52-0.7) than for perfusion (65%-80%, kappa = 0.32-0.6). For all measures, there were no significant differences in reproducibility between nuclear cardiologists and cardiology trainees. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of ECG-gated SPECT images has high reproducibility and agreement among both nuclear cardiologists and cardiology trainees.