Myocardial perfusion SPECT in Australia: Acquisition parameters

Janelle M. Wheat*, Geoffrey M. Currie, Brooke Adams

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Introduction: Despite clear guidelines provided by the Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM) and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology (ASNC), there is no universally accepted consensus on acquisition protocols for myocardial perfusion SPECT. Methodology: This study was a self administered, anonymous questionnaire of current acquisition procedures employed for myocardial perfusion SPECT across Australia. The sampling frame comprised 136 Nuclear Medicine departments across Australia including all departments accredited by the Australia and New Zealand Society of Nuclear Medicine (ANZSNM). Results: With respect to the recommended acquisition parameters outlined by both the SNM and the ASNC, only 14.9% (15/101) of Australian nuclear medicine departments comply with minimum standards. This translates to 17.4% (235/1351) of studies performed weekly in Australia. The stress study only is gated for 58.6% (58/99) of departments (95% CI: 44.6% to 73.7%) while no gating is performed in 9.1% (9/99) of departments (95% CI: 4.9% to 16.4%). The rest study only is gated in 4.0% (4/99) of departments and both stress and rest studies are gated in 28.3% (28/99) of departments. Conclusion: While the principle of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT is without debate there is a requirement for investigation and guidelines for optimisation of acquisition protocols.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)19-24
    Number of pages6
    JournalANZ Nuclear Medicine
    Volume36
    Issue number1
    Publication statusPublished - Mar 2005

    Keywords

    • Acquisition procedure
    • Consensus
    • Myocardial perfusion SPECT

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Myocardial perfusion SPECT in Australia: Acquisition parameters'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this