Faculty Bibliography

In this review, we highlight the need for innovation and creativity to reinvent the field of nuclear cardiology. Revolutionary ideas brought forth today are needed to create greater value in patient care and highlight the need for more contemporary evidence supporting the use of nuclear cardiology practices. We put forth discussions on the need for disruptive innovation in imaging-guided care that places the imager as a central force in care coordination. Value-based nuclear cardiology is defined as care that is both efficient and effective. Novel testing strategies that defer testing in lower risk patients are examples of the kind of innovation needed in today's healthcare environment. A major focus of current research is the evolution of the importance of ischemia and the prognostic significance of non-obstructive atherosclerotic plaque and coronary microvascular dysfunction. Embracing novel paradigms, such as this, can aid in the development of optimal strategies for coronary disease management. We hope that our article will spurn the field toward greater innovation and focus on transformative imaging leading the way for new generations of novel cardiovascular care.

BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) imparts a heavy economic burden on the U.S. health care system. Evidence regarding the long-term costs after comprehensive CVD screening is limited. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study calculated 10-year health care costs for 6,814 asymptomatic participants enrolled in MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), a registry sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health. METHODS:Cumulative 10-year costs for CVD medications, office visits, diagnostic procedures, coronary revascularization, and hospitalizations were calculated from detailed follow-up data. Costs were derived by using Medicare nationwide and zip code-specific costs, inflation corrected, discounted at 3% per year, and presented in 2014 U.S. dollars. RESULTS:Risk factor prevalence increased dramatically and, by 10 years, diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia was reported in 19%, 57%, and 53%, respectively. Self-reported symptoms (i.e., chest pain or shortness of breath) were common (approximately 40% of enrollees). At 10 years, approximately one-third of enrollees reported having an echocardiogram or exercise test, whereas 7% underwent invasive coronary angiography. These utilization patterns resulted in 10-year health care costs of $23,142. The largest proportion of costs was associated with CVD medication use (78%). Approximately $2 of every $10 were spent for outpatient visits and diagnostic testing among the elderly, obese, those with a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level >3 mg/l, or coronary artery calcium score (CACS) ≥400. Costs varied widely from <$7,700 for low-risk (Framingham risk score <6%, 0 CACS, and normal glucose measurements at baseline) to >$35,800 for high-risk (persons with diabetes, Framingham risk score ≥20%, or CACS ≥400) subgroups. Among high-risk enrollees, CVD costs accounted for $74 million of the $155 million consumed by MESA participants. CONCLUSIONS:Longitudinal patterns of health care resource use after screening revealed new evidence on the economic burden of treatment and testing patterns not previously reported. Maintenance of a healthy population has the potential to markedly reduce the economic burden of CVD among asymptomatic individuals.

The assessment of ischemia through myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) is widely accepted as an index step in the diagnostic evaluation of stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). Numerous observational studies have characterized the prognostic significance of ischemia extent and severity. However, the role of ischemia in directing downstream SIHD care including coronary revascularization has remained elusive as reductions in ischemic burden have not translated to improved clinical outcomes in randomized trials. Importantly, selection bias leading to the inclusion of many low risk patients with minimal ischemia have narrowed the generalizability of prior studies along with other limitations. Accordingly, an ongoing randomized controlled trial entitled ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) will compare an invasive coronary revascularization strategy vs a conservative medical therapy approach among stable patients with moderate to severe ischemia. The results of ISCHEMIA may have a substantial impact on the management of SIHD and better define the role of MPI in current SIHD pathways of care.

This document from the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology represents an updated consensus statement on the evidence base of stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), emphasizing new developments in single-photon emission tomography (SPECT) and positron emission tomography (PET) in the clinical evaluation of women presenting with symptoms of stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). The clinical evaluation of symptomatic women is challenging due to their varying clinical presentation, clinical risk factor burden, high degree of comorbidity, and increased risk of major ischemic heart disease events. Evidence is substantial that both SPECT and PET MPI effectively risk stratify women with SIHD. The addition of coronary flow reserve (CFR) with PET improves risk detection, including for women with nonobstructive coronary artery disease and coronary microvascular dysfunction. With the advent of PET with computed tomography (CT), multiparametric imaging approaches may enable integration of MPI and CFR with CT visualization of anatomical atherosclerotic plaque to uniquely identify at-risk women. Radiation dose-reduction strategies, including the use of ultra-low-dose protocols involving stress-only imaging, solid-state detector SPECT, and PET, should be uniformly applied whenever possible to all women undergoing MPI. Appropriate candidate selection for stress MPI and for post-MPI indications for guideline-directed medical therapy and/or invasive coronary angiography are discussed in this statement. The critical need for randomized and comparative trial data in female patients is also emphasized.