Subscribe to RSS
Myocardial Perfusion SPECT and ATTR imaging 2021 in Germany: Results of the 9th SurveyMyokard-Perfusions-SPECT 2021 in Deutschland: Ergebnisse der 9. Erhebung
Aim This paper presents the results of the 9th survey of myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) from the reporting year 2021.
Methods 218 questionnaires (131 practices (PR), 58 hospitals (HO), 29 university hospitals (UH)) were evaluated. Results of the last survey 2018 are set in squared brackets.
Results MPS data from a total of 133,057 [145,930] patients (–8.8%) with 131,868 [143,707] stress and 106,546 [121,899] rest MPS were analysed. A comparison with official data revealed that 54% all MPS were recorded. From 2018 to 2021, official data showed a every year an increase in MPS numbers. On average, 610  MPS patients (+22%) were examined in each department. 74% [69%] of the responders reported an increase or no changes in their MPS patient numbers. Ambulatory care cardiologists represented as always, the mayor referral group (68% [69%]). For the first time, pharmacological stress was more frequently applied than ergometry (42% ). Regadenoson was mostly used. The use of the different protocols remained nearly unchanged. Two-day protocols were predominantly applied (49% [48%]). A shift from multi-headed cameras (58% [72%]) to SPECT-CT systems (24% [17%]) was found. Attenuation correction was performed in 33% [26%] of all MPS. 88% [86%] of all stress, 88% [87%] of all rest and 87% [83%] of all stress and rest MPS were acquired as gated SPECT. 72% [67%] of all departments performed scoring by default. The number of departments without scoring decreased to 13% [16%].
Conclusions The MPS Study 2021 shows that the long-term positive development of MPS imaging in Germany is continuing. The COVID-19 pandemia did not change this trend. The procedural and technical details of MPS imaging reveal a high level of guideline conformity.
KeywordsMyocardial perfusion SPECT, ATTR imaging, utilization review, utilization statistics, numerical data
Received: 07 March 2023
Accepted: 12 April 2023
Article published online:
02 June 2023
© 2023. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
- 1 Lindner O, Burchert W, Bengel FM. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in Germany. Results of the 2005 query and current status. Nuklearmedizin 2007; 46: 49-55 (PMID: 17393039)
- 2 Lindner O, Burchert W, Bengel FM. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy 2006 in Germany. Results of the query and current status. Nuklearmedizin 2008; 47: 139-145 (PMID: 18690372)
- 3 Lindner O, Burchert W, Bengel FM. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy 2007 in Germany--results of the query and current status. Nuklearmedizin 2009; 48: 131-137 DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0226. (PMID: 19384452)
- 4 Lindner O, Burchert W, Bengel FM. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy 2008 in Germany – results of the fourth query. Nuklearmedizin 2010; 49: 65-72 DOI: 10.3413/nukmed-0282. (PMID: 20198276)
- 5 Lindner O, Burchert W, Bengel FM. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy in Germany in 2009: utilization and state of the practice. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1485-1492 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-011-1777-1. (PMID: 21503763)
- 6 Lindner O, Burchert W, Schafers M. et al. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy 2012 in Germany. Results of the 6th Query. Nuklearmedizin 2014; 53: 13-18 DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-0612-13-07. (PMID: 24193544)
- 7 Lindner O, Burchert W, Schafer W. et al. Myocardial perfusion SPECT 2015 in Germany. Results of the 7(th) survey. Nuklearmedizin 2017; 56: 31-38 DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-0858-16-10. (PMID: 27909712)
- 8 Lindner O, Burchert W, Buechel R. et al. Myocardial Perfusion SPECT 2018 in Germany: Results of the 8th Survey. Nuklearmedizin 2019; 58: 425-433 DOI: 10.1055/a-1023-3960. (PMID: 31648359)
- 9 Lindner O, Schäfer W, Rischpler C. et al. Myocardial perfusion SPECT in Germany from 2012 to 2021: insights into development and quality indicators. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2023; 1-8
- 10 Freudenberg LS, Paez D, Giammarile F. et al. Global Impact of COVID-19 on Nuclear Medicine Departments: An International Survey in April 2020. J Nucl Med 2020; 61: 1278-1283 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.120.249821. (PMID: 32709733)
- 11 Statistisches Bundesamt (DESTASIS). Sozialleistungen – Angaben zur Krankenversicherung 2019 (Ergebnisse des Mikrozensus). Accessed March 03, 2023 at: www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Gesellschaft-Umwelt/Gesundheit/Gesundheitszustand-Relevantes-Verhalten/Publikationen/Downloads-Gesundheitszustand/krankenversicherung-mikrozensus-2130110199004.pdf?__blob=publicationFile
- 12 Deutsche Herzstiftung. 33. Deutscher Herzbericht 2021. 2022
- 13 Lindner O, Bengel F, Burchert W. et al. Myokard-Perfusions-SPECT. Myocardial perfusion SPECT – Update S1 guideline. Nuklearmedizin 2017; 56: 115-123 DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-2017040001. (PMID: 28593212)
- 14 Lindner O, Bengel FM, Hacker M. et al. Use of myocardial perfusion imaging and estimation of associated radiation doses in Germany from 2005 to 2012. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2014; 41: 963-971
- 15 Dizdarevic S, Abdulla M, Sewedy T. et al. Impact of COVID-19 on nuclear medicine in the UK. Nucl Med Commun 2021; 42: 138-149 DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001357. (PMID: 33346606)
- 16 Hasnie UA, Hawi R, Andrikopoulou E. et al. Stress testing and myocardial perfusion imaging for patients after recovery from severe COVID-19 infection requiring hospitalization: A single-center experience. J Nucl Cardiol 2021; 28: 2167-2173
- 17 Nappi C, Megna R, Acampa W. et al. Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on myocardial perfusion imaging for ischemic heart disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2021; 48: 421-427 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-04994-6. (PMID: 32778930)
- 18 Williams MC, Shaw L, Hirschfeld CB. et al. Impact of COVID-19 on the imaging diagnosis of cardiac disease in Europe. Open Heart 2021; 8: e001681 DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2021-001681. (PMID: 34353958)
- 19 Knuuti J, Wijns W, Saraste A. et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2020; 41: 407-477 DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425. (PMID: 31504439)
- 20 Sieren MM, Maintz D, Gutberlet M. et al. Current Status of Cardiovascular Imaging in Germany: Structured Data from the National Certification Program, ESCR Registry, and Survey among Radiologists. Rofo 2022; 194: 181-191 DOI: 10.1055/a-1554-9236. (PMID: 34384112)
- 21 Single photon emission computed tomography for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2010; 10: 1-64 (PMID: 23074411)
- 22 Verberne HJ, Acampa W, Anagnostopoulos C. et al. EANM procedural guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and SPECT/CT: 2015 revision. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015; 42: 1929-1940
- 23 Hellwig D, Marienhagen J, Menhart K. et al. Nuclear Medicine in Germany. Updated key data and trends from official statistics. Nuklearmedizin 2017; 56: 55-68
- 24 Longhi S, Guidalotti PL, Quarta CC. et al. Identification of TTR-related subclinical amyloidosis with 99mTc-DPD scintigraphy. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2014; 7: 531-532