SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY IN DIAGNOSTICS OF OBSTRUCTIVE LESION IN CORONARY ARTERIES

Aim. To evaluate the potential of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in diagnostics of obstructive lesion of coronary arteries (CA).

Material and methods. The studied group consisted of 107 patients, admitted for diagnostics and treatment in the SRI CICVD during 2012-2015 with former established diagnosis of coronary heart disease (CHD) or hospitalized to rule it out. For hemodynamically significant stenoses, coronary arteriography (CAG) was applied. Data from CAG was compared with SPECT. As a result, four groups were formed: 1 group — with positive results by SPECT and CAG (SPECT“+”/CAG“+”, n=24); 2 group — with positive SPECT and negative CAG (SPECT“+”/CAG“-”, n=6); 3 group — with negative SPECT and positive CAG (SPECT“-”/CAG“+”, n=36); 4 group — negative both SPECT and CAG (SPECT“-”/CAG“-”, n=41).

Results. In assessment of the patients with suspected CHD, positive result of pharmacological stress-test in SPECT was revealed in 28% cases, and hemodynamically significant CA lesion was found in 56% of patients. Myocardial infarction in anamnesis predominated in SPECT“+”/CAG“+” (79,2%), SPECT“+”/CAG“-” (83,3%), SPECT“-”/CAG“+” (55,6%) comparing to SPECT“-”/CAG“-” (39%; р=0,007). Also, in the group SPECT“-”/CAG“-” pre-test probability of CHD was the lowest (58%) comparing to other groups — 80,5%; 80,5% and 77% (р=0,002). Hence ejection fraction of the left ventricle was significantly lower in the group of SPECT“+”/CAG“+” (53%; р=0,011). In this group also subocclusion was found in circumflex (29,2%) and right CA (45,8%), respectively, р=0,033 and р=0,054. With the false negative results of SPECT there was association of male gender, former coronary bypass operation, increased cardiac volume. Sensitivity of SPECT in hemodynamically significant CA stenoses diagnostics was 40%, specificity — 87%.

Conclusion. The results of current study are important for further elaboration on the approaches to obstructive CHD diagnostics.

single photon emission computed tomography, significant stenoses of coronary arteries

1. 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. J Am CollCardiol2012; 60: e44-e164. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.07.013.

2. Task Force Members; Montalescot G, Sechtem U, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: The Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 2949-3003.

3. Patel MR, Dai D, Hernandez AF, et al. Prevalence and predictors of nonobstructive coronary artery disease identified with coronary angiography in contemporary clinical practice. Am Heart J 2014; 167: 846-52.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2014.03.001.

4. Gaisenok OV, Martsevich SYu. Determination of Indications for Coronary Angiography in Asymptomatic Patients and Patients With Stable Angina. Kardiologija. 2014; 10: 57-62. (In Russ.) Гайсёнок О.В., Марцевич С.Ю. Определение показаний к проведению коронарографии у пациентов без клинических проявлений заболевания и больных со стабильной стенокардией. Кардиология. 2014; 10: 57-62.

5. Korok EV, Sumin AN, Sinkov MA, et al. The prevalence of intact coronary arteries in relation with indications for scheduled coronary arteriography Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2016; 2 (130): 52-9. (In Russ.) Корок Е.В., Сумин А.Н., Синьков М.А., и др. Частота выявления интактных коронарных артерий в зависимости от показаний для плановой коронарной ангиографии. Российский кардиологический журнал 2016; 2 (130): 52-9.

6. Sechtem U, Mahrholdt H, Ong P, et al. Testing in Patients With StableCoronary Artery Disease — The Debate Continues. Circ J. 2016; 80 (4): 802-10. DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-0220.

7. Kuznetsov VA, Yaroslavskaya EI, Gorbatenko EA.Predictors of hemodynamically significant coronary stenosis in patients with disturbed myocardial perfusion based on the results of single-photon emission computed tomography. Klinicheskaja medicina. 2012; 7: 25-30. (In Russ.) Кузнецов В.А., Ярославская Е.И., Горбатенко Е.А. Предикторы гемодинамически значимых коронарных стенозов у пациентов с нарушениями миокардиальной перфузии по данным однофотонной эмиссионной компьютерной томографии миокарда. Клиническая медицина. 2012; 7: 25-30.

8. Miller TD, Hodge DO, Christian TF, et al. Effects of adjustment for referral bias on the sensitivity and specifi city of single photon emission computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Am. J. Med. 2002; 112: 290-7.

9. Yuan JW, Wang YT, Lu CZ. Coronary arteriography in the diagnosis results and prognosis analysis of suspected coronary artery disease in patients with normal SPET myocardial perfusion imaging. Hell J Nucl Med. 2015; 18 (3): 215-21.

10. Sharaf B, Wood T, Shaw L, et al. Adverse outcomes among women presenting withsigns and symptoms of ischemia and no obstructive coronary arterydisease: findings from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute sponsored Women’s Ischemia Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) angiographiccore laboratory. Am Heart J. 2013; 166: 134-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.04.002.

11. Nakanishi R, Gransar H, Slomka P, et al. Predictors of high-risk coronary artery disease in subjects with normal SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016; 23 (3): 530-41. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-015-0150-3.

12. Douglas PS, Daubert MA. Diagnostic accuracy of noninvasive testing: necessary but insufficient. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 8(3). pii: e003138. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.115.003138.

13. Smeeth L, Skinner JS, Ashcroft J, et al. Chest Pain Guideline Development Group. NICE clinical guideline: chest pain of recent onset. Br J Gen Pract.2010 Aug; 60 (577): 607-10. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp10X515124.

14. Nielsen LH, Ortner N, Nørgaard BL, et al. The diagnostic accuracy and outcomes after coronary computed tomography angiograph vs. conventional functional testing in patients with stable angina pectoris: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014; 15 (9): 961-71. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jeu027.

15. Neglia D, Rovai D, Caselli C, et al. EVINCI Study Investigators. Detection of significant coronaryartery disease by non-invasive anatomical and functional imaging. CircCardiovas Imaging. 2015; 8: e002179.

16. Lee H, Yoon YE, Park JB, et al. The Incremental Prognostic Value of Cardiac Computed Tomography in Comparison with Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography in Patients with Suspected Coronary Artery Disease. PLoS One. 2016; 11 (8): e0160188. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160188.