PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 29, 2026Journal of the American College of Cardiology451 citationsOpen Access

Diagnostic Performance of Noninvasive Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Using Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography, Cardiac Magnetic Resonance, and Positron Emission Tomography Imaging for the Detection of Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease

View Full Paper
CJCaroline JaarsmaTLTim LeinerSBSebastiaan C.A.M. Bekkers

Key Points

  • This study aims to assess the diagnostic accuracy of SPECT, CMR, and PET for detecting obstructive coronary artery disease.
  • Examined studies published between 1990 and 2010 using PubMed and citation tracking.
  • Included articles using perfusion imaging as a diagnostic test compared to coronary angiography.
  • Analyzed a total of 166 articles with 17,901 included cases.
  • SPECT had a pooled sensitivity of 88% and specificity of 61%.
  • CMR demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 89% and specificity of 76%.
  • PET showed a pooled sensitivity of 84% and specificity of 81%, with the highest diagnostic performance.

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of the 3 most commonly used noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging modalities, single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and positron emission tomography (PET) perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Additionally, the effect of test and study characteristics was explored. Background Accurate detection of obstructive CAD is important for effective therapy. Noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging is increasingly being applied to gauge the severity of CAD. Methods Studies published between 1990 and 2010 identified by PubMed search and citation tracking were examined. A study was included if a perfusion imaging modality was used as a diagnostic test for the detection of obstructive CAD and coronary angiography as the reference standard (>= 50% diameter stenosis). Results Of the 3,635 citations, 166 articles (n = 17,901) met the inclusion criteria: 114 SPECT, 37 CMR, and 15 PET articles. There were not enough publications on other perfusion techniques such as perfusion echocardiography and computed tomography to include these modalities into the study. The patient-based analysis per imaging modality demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 88% (95% confidence interval CI: 88% to 89%), 89% (95% CI: 88% to 91%), and 84% (95% CI: 81% to 87%) for SPECT, CMR, and PET, respectively; with a pooled specificity of 61% (95% CI: 59% to 62%), 76% (95% CI: 73% to 78%), and 81% (95% CI: 74% to 87%). This resulted in a pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 15.31 (95% CI: 12.66 to 18.52; I-2 63.6%), 26.42 (95% CI: 17.69 to 39.47; I-2 58.3%), and 36.47 (95% CI: 21.48 to 61.92; I-2 0%). Most of the evaluated test and study characteristics did not affect the ranking of diagnostic performances. Conclusions SPECT, CMR, and PET all yielded a high sensitivity, while a broad range of specificity was observed. SPECT is widely available and most extensively validated; PET achieved the highest diagnostic performance; CMR may provide an alternative without ionizing radiation and a similar diagnostic accuracy as PET. We suggest that referring physicians consider these findings in the context of local expertise and infrastructure. (J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1719-28) Original language English Pages (from-to) 1719-1728 Number of pages 10 Journal Journal of the American College of Cardiology Volume 59 Issue number 19 DOIs https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.12.040 Publication status Published - 8 May 2012 Keywords cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging meta-analysis perfusion positron emission tomography single-photon emission computed tomography

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Jaarsma et al. (2012) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a41e433d8bc5ceb756acc11https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2011.12.040
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper