Myocardial perfusion imaging versus biochemical markers in acute coronary syndromes.

The assessment and appropriate clinical management of patients with acute chest pain and non-diagnostic electrocardiograms remain a continuing clinical problem. Accordingly, there is considerable interest in evaluating new strategies to improve early diagnostic accuracy in patients with possible acute myocardial ischaemia. Cardiac troponins (T and I) and acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging have similar sensitivities for detecting acute myocardial infarction. Whereas cardiac markers require 6-12 h to become positive, acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging immediately reflects the status of regional myocardial blood flow at the time of radiopharmaceutical injection. The measurement of cardiac troponins is particularly useful in the diagnosis and estimation of the degree of myocardial injury in those patients with a high likelihood of coronary artery disease and myocardial necrosis and for prognostication of adverse cardiac events in those patients with unstable angina. In contrast, the most appropriate use of acute rest myocardial perfusion imaging is in the setting of patients with acute ischaemic symptoms, non-diagnostic electrocardiogram and a low likelihood of myocardial necrosis, in which early imaging will assist in effective triage decisions.