Three years' registry on myocardial perfusion imaging patients in Ain shams university nuclear cardiology unit

Abstract

Abstract Background The development in nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) has provided diagnostic and prognostic implications in CAD patients, leading to an explosive increase in the performanceofthesestudies. Thisexpansionofimagingspectrumisassociatedwithwidespread concern regarding imaging utilization and increased healthcare costs. There is no comparative data that guide the use of these modalities with respect to appropriateness and patients’ benefit. Targeted data collection, through registry studies, enable analysis of both quality and outcomes with big advantages of reflecting real world daily practice and identifying the gaps in care which may not otherwise be feasible in high-quality randomized control trials. Objective To explore the extent to which stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) studies met published appropriate use criteria (AUC), and the real world practice in the nuclear cardiology unit of Ain shams University. Patients and Methods It was a retrospective cohort study that included 2598 patients who underwent myocardial perfusion imaging in Ain Shams university nuclear cardiology unit throughout the period from January 2017 to December2019. All patients were subjected to thorough demographic data, history of cardiovascular risk factors (arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, smoking, family history of premature cardiovascular diseases), indication of the test, preprocedural ECG, ejection fraction by echocardiography, previous coronary angiography and PCI or CABG, calculation of pretest probability and Framingham risk score, determination of appropriateness use criteria and stress-rest Tc 99m imaging to detect the presence of ischemia and one day Tc 99m imaging to detect viability. Results The study included 2598 patients with mean age of 57.76 years, with male predominance (68.1%), 38.2% were diabetics and 53% had hypertension. The most common indications to undergo MPI was the exclusion of CAD as a cause of chest pain in 38.8% of patients followed by the evaluation of symptomatic post PCI patients in 21.9%. Moreover 63.8% of patients showed appropriate tests, while 18.6% of patients showed uncertain tests. Whereas 17.6% of patients had inappropriate studies. 81% of appropriate tests showed positive results of SPECT. Whereas in the inappropriate and the uncertain category, the negative test for ischemia predominated. Conclusion We have established that appropriateness criteria are effective in identifying appropriateness of SPECT in a university center located in Cairo. Also, we concluded that in our unit the appropriate tests were more prominent than inappropriate and unclassified tests. Most of the appropriate studies were positive for ischemia. While, most of the inappropriate and uncertain tests were normal and the commonest cause of referral for MPI was exclusion of CAD as a cause of chest pain.