Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin 2004; 42(04): 105-106
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1625311
Editorial
Schattauer GmbH

Comparing apples with addled pears

The need to optimize study protocols to compare imaging modalities for assessing myocardial perfusion
M. Schäfers
1   Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Münster
,
U. Büll
2   Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, RWTH Klinikum Aachen
,
F. Bengel
3   Dept. of Nuclear Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, München, Germany
,
the working group Cardiovascular Nuclear Medicine of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nuklearmedizin (DGN) › Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History





Publication Date:
10 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

 

 

  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Knapp WH. Guidelines for myocardial per-fusion scintigraphy. Nuklearmedizin 1999; 38: 226-9.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Schäfers M. Methods and clinical applications in nuclear cardiology: a position statement. Nuklearmedizin 2002; 41: 3-13.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar