Reproducibility of Left Ventricular Function Derived From Cardiac Magnetic Resonance and Gated 13N-Ammonia Positron Emission Tomography Myocardial Perfusion Imaging: A Head-to-Head Comparison Using Hybrid Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and gated 13N-ammonia positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (PET-MPI) offer accurate and highly comparable global left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measurements. In addition to accuracy, however, reproducibility is crucial to avoid variations in LVEF assessment potentially negatively impacting treatment decisions. We performed a head-to-head comparison of the reproducibility of LVEF measurements derived from simultaneously acquired CMR and PET-MPI using different state-of-the-art commercially available software.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

93 patients undergoing hybrid PET/MR were retrospectively included. LVEF was derived from CMR and PET-MPI at two separate core labs, using two state-of-the-art software packages for CMR (cvi42 and Medis Suite MR) and PET (QPET and CardIQ Physio). Intra- and inter-reader agreement was assessed using correlation and Bland-Altman (BA) analyses.

RESULTS

While intra- and inter-reader reproducibility of LVEF was high among both modalities and all software packages (r ≥ 0.87 and ICC≥0.91, all significant at p < 0.0001), LVEF derived from PET-MPI and analyzed with QPET outperformed all other analyses (intra-reader reproducibility: r = 0.99, ICC=0.99; inter-reader reproducibility: r = 0.98, ICC=1.00; Pearson correlations significantly higher than all others at p ≤ 0.0001). BA analyses showed smaller biases for LVEF derived from PET-MPI (-0.1% and +0.9% for intra-reader, -0.4% and -0.8% for inter-reader agreement) than those derived from CMR (+0.7% and +2.8% for intra-reader, -0.9% and -2.2% for inter-reader agreement) with similar results for BA limits of agreement.

CONCLUSION

Gated 13N-ammonia PET-MPI provides equivalent reproducibility of LVEF compared to CMR. It may offer a valid alternative to CMR for patients requiring LV functional assessment.

Eco-Friendly and COVID-19 Friendly? Decreasing the Carbon Footprint of the Operating Room in the COVID-19 Era

Surgery is one of the most energy-intensive branches of healthcare. Although the COVID-19 pandemic has reduced surgical volumes, infection control protocols have increased the ecological footprint of surgery owing to the extensive use of personal protective equipment, sanitation, testing and isolation resources. The burden of environmental diseases requiring surgical care, the international commitment towards environmental sustainability and the global efforts to return to the pre-pandemic surgical workflow call for action towards climate-friendly surgery. The authors have searched the peer-reviewed and gray literature for clinical studies, reports and guidelines related to the ecological footprint of surgical care and the available solutions and frameworks to reduce it. Numerous studies concede that surgery is associated with a high rate of energy utilization and waste generation that is comparable to major non-medical sources of pollution. Recommendations and research questions outlining environmentally sustainable models of surgical practices span from sanitation and air quality improvement systems to the allocation of non-recyclable consumables and energy-efficient surgical planning. The latter are particularly relevant to infection control protocols for COVID-19. Paving the way towards climate-friendly surgery is a worthy endeavor with a major potential to improve surgical practice and outcomes in the long term.

Is surgery on the right track? The burden of wrong-site surgery

Surgery is a cornerstone of modern health care. Medical errors resulting from the clinical treatment of patients are a problem with global relevance. Among "never events," wrong-site surgery accounts for preventable mistakes with a big impact on patients as well as the economy. Wrong-site surgery has many contributing factors, whose identification is challenging. Nevertheless, it remains indisputable that wrong-site surgery affects patients' lives on many levels, ranging from physical disability to mental health. In addition, it aggravates the economic integrity of healthcare systems, healthcare workers' professional standards, and the public's trust in surgical services. Possible solutions for wrong-site surgery include perioperative protocols, surgical checklists, effective communication, education, continuous evaluation of existing procedures, and the implementation of new technology.

Environmental sustainability in healthcare: Time to make outpatient care in orthopaedics and rheumatology greener

INTRODUCTION

Chronic musculoskeletal conditions affect billions of individuals and constitute the greatest contributor to disability worldwide. Climate change has a negative impact on these conditions, causing a rising number of patients seeking medical attention in outpatient orthopaedic and rheumatology clinics. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the delivery of care by these facilities tends to become more energy-intensive due to the increased usage of protective equipment and testing for the purpose of maintaining hygienic conditions. Therefore, practitioners and health bodies in the field need to take action to make their practice more environmentally sustainable and protect both the environment and their patients.

METHODS

The authors searched peer reviewed and grey literature for relevant sources.

RESULTS

The present review of the literature provides an overview of the environmental pollution associated with outpatient musculoskeletal care and discusses evidence-based recommendations from previous studies.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine, rationalised use of consumables and equipment, physician-led climate advocacy and patient education have a major potential to turn the tide.

An anonymous DNA probe E141 (D5S99) on chromosome 5 detects an EcoRI polymorphism

Images