A Commentary on the SPARC Study

In the most recent report (1), this translated into higher mortality in the PET group than in the SPECT group (5.5% vs. 1.6%) and a lower frequency of deaths in the CTA group (0.7%). [...]on the basis of the data from both reports (1,2), we conclude that the patients referred for PET were at signifi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of the American College of Cardiology Vol. 64; no. 7; pp. 740 - 741
Main Authors Lundbye, Justin B., MD, Heller, Gary V., MD, PhD
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States Elsevier Limited 19.08.2014
Subjects
Cardiology
Cardiovascular
Cardiovascular disease
Coronary Artery Disease - diagnosis
Coronary vessels
Coronary Vessels - anatomy & histology
Female
Health Care Costs - trends
Humans
Internal Medicine
Male
Medical imaging
Mortality
Myocardial Perfusion Imaging - economics
Patients
Studies
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In the most recent report (1), this translated into higher mortality in the PET group than in the SPECT group (5.5% vs. 1.6%) and a lower frequency of deaths in the CTA group (0.7%). [...]on the basis of the data from both reports (1,2), we conclude that the patients referred for PET were at significantly higher risk for both CAD and subsequent cardiac events than the patients referred for SPECT or CTA. Because of the low number of patients enrolled in each group, this study could not answer questions such as the best modality for long-term benefit.
Bibliography:SourceType-Other Sources-1
content type line 63
ObjectType-Correspondence-1
ObjectType-Commentary-2
ISSN:0735-1097
1558-3597
DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.05.035