Comparing apples with addled pears

Nuklearmedizin 2004; 42(04): 105-106
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1625311

Editorial

Schattauer GmbH

The need to optimize study protocols to compare imaging modalities for assessing myocardial perfusion

Authors

M. Schäfers

¹Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Münster
U. Büll

²Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, RWTH Klinikum Aachen
F. Bengel

³Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, München, Germany

the working group Cardiovascular Nuclear Medicine of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nuklearmedizin (DGN)

References
1 Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH. et al., American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, American Society for Nuclear Cardiology.. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging – executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to Revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging). Circulation 2003; 108: 1404-18.
2 Knapp WH. Guidelines for myocardial per-fusion scintigraphy. Nuklearmedizin 1999; 38: 226-9.
3 Schäfers M. Methods and clinical applications in nuclear cardiology: a position statement. Nuklearmedizin 2002; 41: 3-13.
4 Underwood SR, Anagnostopoulos C, Cerqueira M. et al. British Cardiac Society, British Nuclear Cardiology Society, British Nuclear Medicine Society, Royal College of Physicians of London, Royal College of Radiologists.. Myocardial perfusion scintigraphy: the evidence. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 261-91.