title: Comparison of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography and thallium-201 SPECT imaging for detection of coronary artery disease.
abstract: The diagnostic performance of rubidium-82 (Rb-82) positron emission tomography (PET) and thallium-201 (Tl-201) single-photon emission-computed tomography (SPECT) for detecting coronary artery disease was investigated in 81 patients (52 men, 29 women). PET studies using 60 mCi of Rb-82 were performed at baseline and after intravenous infusion of 0.56 mg/kg dipyridamole in conjunction with handgrip stress. Tl-201 SPECT was performed after dipyridamole-handgrip stress and, in a subset of patients, after treadmill exercise. Sensitivity, specificity and overall diagnostic accuracy were assessed using both visually and quantitatively interpreted coronary angiograms. The overall sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of PET for detection of coronary artery disease (greater than 50% diameter stenosis) were 84, 88 and 85%, respectively. In comparison, the performance of SPECT revealed a sensitivity of 84%, specificity of 53% (p less than 0.05 vs PET) and accuracy of 79%. Similar results were obtained using either visual or quantitative angiographic criteria for severity of coronary artery disease. In 43 patients without prior myocardial infarction, the sensitivity for detection of disease was 71 and 73%, respectively, similar for both PET and SPECT. There was no significant difference in diagnostic performance between imaging modalities when 2 different modes of stress (exercise treadmill vs intravenous dipyridamole plus handgrip) were used with SPECT imaging. Thus, Rb-82 PET provides improved specificity compared with Tl-201 SPECT for identifying coronary artery disease, most likely due to the higher photon energy of Rb-82 and attenuation correction provided by PET. However, post-test referral cannot be entirely excluded as a potential explanation for the lower specificity of Tl-201 SPECT.
authors.affiliation: University of Michigan Medical Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor.
authors.forename: R E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Stewart
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Schwaiger
authors.forename: E
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Molina
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Popma
authors.forename: G M
authors.initials: GM
authors.lastname: Gacioch
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kalus
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Squicciarini
authors.forename: Z R
authors.initials: ZR
authors.lastname: al-Aouar
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Schork
authors.forename: D E
authors.initials: DE
authors.lastname: Kuhl
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002932:Cineangiography; D017023:Coronary Angiography; D003327:Coronary Disease / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D005080:Exercise Test; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015588:Observer Variation; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012414:Rubidium Radioisotopes; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013794:Thallium Radioisotopes; D014055:Tomography, Emission-Computed; D015899:Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon
chemical_list: D012414:Rubidium Radioisotopes; D013794:Thallium Radioisotopes