Gulenchyn K Y, McEwan A J, Freeman M, Kiess M, O'Neill B J, Beanlands R S
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hamilton Health Sciences Centre, Hamilton, Ontario.
Can J Cardiol. 2006 Aug;22(10):827-33. doi: 10.1016/s0828-282x(06)70300-2.
Cardiovascular nuclear medicine uses agents labelled with radioisotopes that can be imaged with cameras (single-photon emission tomography [SPECT] or positron emission tomography [PET]) capable of detecting gamma photons to show physiological parameters such as myocardial perfusion, myocardial viability or ventricular function. There is a growing body of literature providing guidelines for the appropriate use of these techniques, but there are little data regarding the appropriate timeframe during which the procedures should be accessed. An expert working group composed of cardiologists and nuclear medicine specialists conducted an Internet search to identify current wait times and recommendations for wait times for a number of cardiac diagnostic tools and procedures, including cardiac catheterization and angioplasty, bypass grafting and vascular surgery. These data were used to estimate appropriate wait times for cardiovascular nuclear medicine procedures. The estimated times were compared with current wait times in each province. Wait time benchmarks were developed for the following: myocardial perfusion with either exercise or pharmacological stress and SPECT or PET imaging; myocardial viability assessment with either fluorodeoxyglucose SPECT or PET imaging, or thallium-201 SPECT imaging; and radionuclide angiography. Emergent, urgent and nonurgent indications were defined for each clinical examination. In each case, appropriate wait time benchmarks were defined as within 24 h for emergent indications, within three days for urgent indications and within 14 days for nonurgent indications. Substantial variability was noted from province to province with respect to access for these procedures. For myocardial perfusion imaging, mean emergent/urgent wait times varied from four to 24 days, and mean nonurgent wait times varied from 15 to 158 days. Only Ontario provided limited access to viability assessment, with fluorodeoxyglucose available in one centre. Mean emergent/urgent wait times for access to viability assessment with thallium-201 SPECT imaging varied from three to eight days, with the exception of Newfoundland, where an emergent/urgent assessment was not available; mean nonurgent wait times varied from seven to 85 days. Finally, for radionuclide angiography, mean emergent/urgent wait times varied from two to 20 days, and nonurgent wait times varied from eight to 36 days. Again, Newfoundland centres were unable to provide emergent/urgent access. The publication of these data and proposed wait times as national targets is a step toward the validation of these recommendations through consultation with clinicians caring for cardiac patients across Canada.
心血管核医学使用标记有放射性同位素的试剂,这些试剂可通过能够检测伽马光子的相机(单光子发射断层扫描[SPECT]或正电子发射断层扫描[PET])进行成像,以显示诸如心肌灌注、心肌存活性或心室功能等生理参数。有越来越多的文献为这些技术的合理使用提供指导原则,但关于应在多长时间内进行这些检查的相关数据却很少。一个由心脏病专家和核医学专家组成的专家工作组进行了互联网搜索,以确定一些心脏诊断工具和检查(包括心脏导管插入术和血管成形术、搭桥手术和血管手术)目前的等待时间以及关于等待时间的建议。这些数据被用于估计心血管核医学检查的合理等待时间。将估计时间与每个省份目前的等待时间进行比较。为以下检查制定了等待时间基准:运动或药物负荷下的心肌灌注及SPECT或PET成像;使用氟脱氧葡萄糖SPECT或PET成像或铊-201 SPECT成像进行心肌存活性评估;以及放射性核素血管造影。为每项临床检查定义了紧急、加急和非紧急指征。在每种情况下,合理的等待时间基准被定义为:紧急指征在24小时内,加急指征在三天内,非紧急指征在14天内。关于这些检查的可及性,各省之间存在很大差异。对于心肌灌注成像,紧急/加急平均等待时间从4天到24天不等,非紧急平均等待时间从15天到158天不等。只有安大略省提供有限的存活性评估服务,一个中心有氟脱氧葡萄糖。使用铊-201 SPECT成像进行存活性评估的紧急/加急平均等待时间从3天到8天不等,纽芬兰省除外,该省无法提供紧急/加急评估;非紧急平均等待时间从7天到85天不等。最后,对于放射性核素血管造影,紧急/加急平均等待时间从2天到20天不等,非紧急等待时间从8天到36天不等。同样,纽芬兰省的中心无法提供紧急/加急检查。公布这些数据以及提议将等待时间作为全国目标,是朝着通过与加拿大各地照顾心脏病患者的临床医生协商来验证这些建议迈出的一步。