CT Attenuation correction and its impact on image quality of myocardial perfusion imaging in coronary artery disease: A systematic review

Document Type : Review article

Authors

1 Department of Medical Imaging, Medical Radiations and Nuclear Medicine, Eastern Health, Victoria, Australia

2 Department of Medical Imaging, Monash Health, Peninsula Health, Victoria, Australia

3 Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences, Monash University, Australia

4 School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Allied Health Clinical Research Office, Eastern Health, Victoria, Australia

Abstract

Myocardial perfusion imaging is a non-invasive procedure that plays an integral role in the diagnosis and management of coronary artery disease. With the routine use of computerised tomography attenuation correction (CTAC) in myocardial perfusion imaging still under debate, the aim of this review was to determine the impact of CTAC on image quality in myocardial perfusion imaging. Medline, Embase and CINAHL were searched from the earliest available time until August 2019. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2. Details pertaining to image quality and diagnostic accuracy were analysed, and results summarised descriptively. Three studies with ‘unclear’ risk of bias and low applicability concerns (1002 participants) from a yield of 2725 articles were identified. Two studies demonstrated an increase in image quality, and one study found no difference in image quality when using CTAC compared to no attenuation correction. Benefits of CTAC for improving image quality remain unclear. Given the potential exposure risk with the addition of CTAC, patient and clinician factors should inform decision making for use of CTAC in myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease.

Keywords

References

1. Huang JY, Huang CK, Yen RF, Wu HY, Tu YK, Cheng MF, et al. Diagnostic performance of attenuation-corrected myocardial perfusion imaging for coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Nucl Med. 2016; 57(12):1893-8.
2. Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Attenuation correction in cardiac positron emission tomography and single-photon emission computed tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 1995; 2(3):246-55.
3. Nishina H, Slomka PJ, Abidov A, Yoda S, Akincioglu C, Kang X, et al. Combined supine and prone quantitative myocardial perfusion SPECT: method development and clinical validation in patients with no known coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 2006; 47(1):51-8.
4. Taqueti VR, Dorbala S, Wolinsky D, Abbott B, Heller GV, Bateman TM, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging in women for the evaluation of stable ischemic heart diseasestate-of-the-evidence and clinical recommendations. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017; 24(4):1402-26.
5. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Delbeke D, Abbara S, DePuey EG, Dilsizian V, et al. SNMMI/ASNC/SCCT guideline for cardiac SPECT/CT and PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2013; 54(8):1485-507.
6. Cherry S, Sorensen J, Phelps ME. Physics in Nuclear Medicine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders Company; 2003. 313-315.
7. Malkerneker D, Brenner R, Martin WH, Sampson UKA, Feurer ID, Kronenberg MW, et al. CT-based attenuation correction versus prone imaging to decrease equivocal interpretations of rest/stress Tc-99m tetrofosmin SPECT MPI. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007; 14(3):314-23.
8. Tootell AK, Szczepura K, Hogg P. Comparison of effective dose and lifetime risk of cancer incidence of CT attenuation correction acquisitions and radiopharmaceutical administration for myocardial perfusion imaging.Brit J Radiol. 2014;87(1041):20140110.
9. Benkiran M, Mariano-Goulart D, Bourdon A, Sibille L, Bouallegue FB. Is computed tomography attenuation correction more efficient than gated single photon emission computed tomography analysis in improving the diagnostic performance of myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with low prevalence of ischemic heart disease? Nucl Med Commun. 2015; 36(1):69-77.
10. Burrell S, MacDonald A. Artifacts and pitfalls in myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med Technol. 2006; 34(4):193-211; quiz 2-4.
11. Wells RG. Dose reduction is good but it is image quality that matters. J Nucl Cardiol. 2020; 27(1):238-40.
12. Internaitonal Atomic Energy Agency. Image quality and quality control in diagnostic nuclear medicine. https://www.iaea.org/resources/ rpop/ health-professionals/ nuclear- medicine/ diagnostic-nuclearmedicine/ image-quality-and-quality-control. Accessed 24 Feb 2020.
13. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews. 2015; 4(1):1.
14. GraphPad.QuickCalcs.https://www.graphpad .Com/quickcalcs/ kappa1/. Accessed 10 Arpil 2020.
15. Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S, Deeks JJ, Reitsma JB, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Int Med 2011; 155(8):529-36.
16. Whiting PF, Weswood ME, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Bossuyt PN, Kleijnen J. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006; 6:9.
17. Ali I, Ruddy TD, Almgrahi A, Anstett FG, Wells RG. Half-time SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging with attenuation correction. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(4):554-62.
18. Savvopoulos CA, Spyridonidis T, Papandrianos N, Vassilakos PJ, Alexopoulos D, Apostolopoulos DJ. CT-based attenuation correction in Tl-201 myocardial perfusion scintigraphy is less effective than noncorrected SPECT for risk stratification. J Nucl Cardiol. 2014; 21(3):519-31.
19. Issa G, Taslakian B, Itani M, Hitti E, Batley N, Saliba M, et al. The discrepancy rate between preliminary and official reports of emergency radiology studies: a performance indicator and quality improvement method. Acta Radiol (Stockholm, Sweden: 1987). 2015; 56(5):598- 604.
20. Nodine CF, Kundel HL, Mello-Thoms C, Weinstein SP, Orel SG, Sullivan DC, et al. How experience and training influence mammography expertise. Acad Radiol. 1999; 6(10):575-85.
21. Pearce B, Turnbull R, Mandarano G. Radiographer comment on extremity trauma imaging in Australia: Educational intervention improves diagnostic accuracy. Radiol Technol. 2019; 90(6):611-21.
22. Williams I, Baird M, Pearce B, Schneider M. Improvement of radiographer commenting accuracy of the appendicular skeleton following a short course in plain radiography image interpretation: A pilot study. J Med Radiat Sci. 2019; 66(1):14-9.
23. Araujo LI, Jimenez-Hoyuela JM, McClellan JR, Lin E, Viggiano J, Alavi A. Improved uniformity in tomographic myocardial perfusion imaging with attenuation correction and enhanced acquisition and processing. J Nucl Med. 2000; 41(7):1139-44.
24. Doukky R, Rahaby M, Alyousef T, Vashistha R, Chawla D, Amin AP. Soft tissue attenuation patterns associated with supine acquisition SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging: A descriptive study. TOCMJ. 2012; 6:33-7.
25. Huang R, Li F, Zhao Z, Liu B, Ou X, Tian R, et al. Hybrid SPECT/CT for attenuation correction of stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Clin Nucl Med. 2011; 36(5):344-9.
26. Verberne HJ, Acampa W, Anagnostopoulos C, Ballinger J, Bengel F, De Bondt P, et al. EANM procedural guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and SPECT/CT: 2015 revision. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015; 42(12):1929-40. 27.
27 Fukushima Y, Kumita S. Cradiac SPECT/CT Imaging: CT attenuation corrcetion and SPECT/CT hybrid imaging. Int J Radiol Med Imag. 2016; 2:113.
28. Fukami M, Tamura K, Nakamura Y, Nakatsukasa S, Sasaki M. Evaluating the effectiveness of a single CT method for attenuation correction in stress-rest myocardial perfusion imaging with thallium- 201 chloride SPECT. Radiol Phys Technol. 2020; 13(1):20-26.
Asia Oceania Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Biology
Volume 9, Issue 1
January 2021
Pages 31-38

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics