Search

Aims: Recovery of cardiovascular diagnostic testing in Italy after the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has not been quantified. The study aims to describe cardiac diagnostic procedure volumes, centres practice and protocols, and staff members' well-being 1 year after COVID-19 outbreak in Italy., Methods and Results: A global survey was conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency to evaluate changes in cardiac diagnostic procedure volumes in April 2021. Evaluated procedures were transoesophageal echocardiogram, coronary computed tomography angiography, coronary artery calcium scanning, nuclear medicine infection studies, invasive coronary angiography, rest and stress transthoracic echocardiogram, cardiac magnetic resonance, single-photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography, and stress electrocardiogram. Data were compared with April 2020 and March 2019. Forty-two Italian centres took part in the survey. In April 2020, there was a 72% decrease of median volumes of cardiac diagnostic procedures compared with March 2019. In April 2021, volumes of cardiac diagnostic procedures remained decreased by 3% when compared with March 2019. Stress electrocardiogram, coronary computed tomography angiography, and stress cardiac magnetic resonance volumes increased in April 2021 compared with baseline (29%, 6%, and 16%, respectively). The majority of centres had adopted physical distancing measures (93%), COVID-19 screening through questionnaires (76%), or temperature checks (93%). Twenty-five per cent of physicians at Italian responding sites reported excessive levels of psychological stress., Conclusion: In April 2021, volumes of cardiac diagnostic procedures at Italian responding sites were still recovering. Centres had implemented several adaptations to ensure the provision of care to their patients. Even 1 year after the pandemic, a substantial minority of Italian healthcare providers were still experiencing excessive psychological stress., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately impacted Latin America (LATAM), significantly disrupting cardiovascular testing. This study evaluated cardiac procedure recovery in LATAM one year after the outbreak., Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) surveyed 669 centers in 107 countries worldwide, including 135 facilities in 19 LATAM countries, to assess cardiovascular procedure volumes in March 2019, April 2020, and April 2021, and changes in center practices and staffing conditions one year into the COVID-19 pandemic., Findings: LATAM centers reported a 21 % decrease in procedure volumes in April 2021 from pre-pandemic-baseline, vs. a 0 % change in the rest of the world (RoW), and greater volume reductions for almost all procedure types. Centers in Central America and Mexico reported the largest procedure reductions (47 % reduction) compared to the Caribbean (15 %), and South America (14 %, p = 0.01), and this LATAM region was a significant predictor of lower procedure recovery in multivariable regression. More LATAM centers reported reduced salaries and increased layoffs of clinical staff compared to RoW, and LATAM respondents estimated that half of physician and non-physician staff experienced excess psychological stress related to the pandemic, compared to 25 % and 30 % in RoW (p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Cardiovascular testing recovery in LATAM trailed behind RoW for most procedure types, with centers in Central America and Mexico reporting the greatest volume reductions. This study found lasting impacts of COVID-19 on cardiovascular care in LATAM and the need for mental health support for LATAM healthcare workers in current and future pandemics., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [Dr. Massardo has been supported by Pfizer for educational activities related to ATTR amyloidosis and has participated in two multicenter research projects supported by Pfizer. Dr. Williams has given talks for Canon Medical Systems, Siemens Healthineers and Novartis and is supported by the British Heart Foundation (FS/ICRF/20/26002). Dr. Villines is a current employee of Elucid Biomining, Inc that is unrelated to this work. Dr. Dorbala has received honoraria from Pfizer and GE Healthcare; and has received grants to her institution from Pfizer and GE Healthcare. Dr. Einstein has received fees for speaking from Ionetix, consulting from W. L. Gore & Associates, serving on a scientific advisory committee for Canon Medical Systems USA, and authorship from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare – UpToDate; has grants/grants pending from Attralus, Canon Medical Systems USA, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, W. L. Gore & Associates, XyloCor Therapeutics, Neovasc, Intellia Therapeutics, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, the National Institutes of Health, and the IAEA. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose]., (Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Purpose: To characterize the recovery of diagnostic cardiovascular procedure volumes in U.S. and non-U.S. facilities in the year following the initial COVID-19 outbreak., Materials and Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) coordinated a worldwide study called the IAEA Noninvasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19 2 (INCAPS COVID 2), collecting data from 669 facilities in 107 countries, including 93 facilities in 34 U.S. states, to determine the impact of the pandemic on diagnostic cardiovascular procedure volumes. Participants reported volumes for each diagnostic imaging modality used at their facility for March 2019 (baseline), April 2020, and April 2021. This secondary analysis of INCAPS COVID 2 evaluated differences in changes in procedure volume between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and among U.S. regions. Factors associated with return to prepandemic volumes in the United States were also analyzed in a multivariable regression analysis., Results: Reduction in procedure volumes in April 2020 compared with baseline was similar for U.S. and non-U.S. facilities (-66% vs -71%, P = .27). U.S. facilities reported greater return to baseline in April 2021 than did all non-U.S. facilities (4% vs -6%, P = .008), but there was no evidence of a difference when comparing U.S. facilities with non-U.S. high-income country (NUHIC) facilities (4% vs 0%, P = .18). U.S. regional differences in return to baseline were observed between the Midwest (11%), Northeast (9%), South (1%), and West (-7%, P = .03), but no studied factors were significant predictors of 2021 change from prepandemic baseline., Conclusion: The reductions in cardiac testing during the early pandemic have recovered within a year to prepandemic baselines in the United States and NUHICs, while procedure volumes remain depressed in lower-income countries. Keywords: SPECT, Cardiac, Epidemiology, Angiography, CT Angiography, CT, Echocardiography, SPECT/CT, MR Imaging, Radionuclide Studies, COVID-19, Cardiovascular Imaging, Diagnostic Cardiovascular Procedure, Cardiovascular Disease, Cardiac Testing Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2023., Competing Interests: Disclosures of conflicts of interest: C.B.H. No relevant relationships. S.D. Research grants to author’s institution from Pfizer, GE HealthCare, Attralus, Siemens, and Philips; consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Novo Nordisk; support from Novo Nordisk for travel to an advisory board meeting. L.J.S. No relevant relationships. T.C.V. No relevant relationships. A.D.C. Grant support from GW Heart and Vascular Institute; consultant for Siemens Healthineers; equity in Cleerly. N.B. No relevant relationships. R.J.C. No relevant relationships. G.K. No relevant relationships. J.V.V. No relevant relationships. M.C.W. Support from the British Heart Foundation (FS/ICRF/20/26002); payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or education events from Canon Medical Systems, Siemens Healthineers, and Novartis; member of the Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging editorial board. M.A.M. Research support from Siemens; consulting fees from Jubilant and Philips; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Jubilant. D.S.B. Receives software royalties from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center; consultant for General Electric and Bayer. A.B. No relevant relationships. R.W.B. No relevant relationships. P.E.B. No relevant relationships. M.J.B. Grant support from General Electric. R.P.B.P. Women as One grant ($25 000), paid to author’s institution; Knowledge to Practice honoraria ($500) for being a panelist during a virtual educational event; honoraria ($1000, $2500) from American College of Radiology for CME education products; member of American Society of Nuclear Cardiology board of directors, Intersocietal Accreditation Commission CT board of directors, and American College of Cardiology board of governors. M.Y.C. No relevant relationships. M.P.D. Salary support from Genentech for COVID-19 research. R.D. No relevant relationships. M.F. Grants or contracts from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the American Heart Association (AHA); consulting fees from Biography, Elucid, HeartFlow, and Siemens Healthineers; vice-president of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography; stock or stock options in Elucid. J.B.G. No relevant relationships. F.G.H. Grant support from GE HealthCare. R.C.H. No relevant relationships. L.K. Member of the Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging editorial board. V.L.M. Grants or contracts from the NIH, AHA, and Siemens; consulting fees from Siemens, INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions, and Ionetix; member of AHA Cardiovascular Radiology and Interventions Council Leadership Committee and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology Program Committee; stock in General Electric, Ionetix, and Cardinal Health; scientific advisor to Ionetix; received software from INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions. J.N. No relevant relationships. P.F.R.L. Grants or contracts from iTHRIV Scholar, which is supported in part by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the NIH (award nos. UL1TR003015 and KL2TR003016); patent planned, issued, or pending number 3062/140PCT/US for "Methods, systems, and computer-readable media for utilizing US device to perform MV decalcification." N.R.S. Grant support from Pfizer; stock in General Electric. A.S. No relevant relationships. P.S. Grant funding from Pfizer to author’s institution and from Astellas; royalties from UpToDate; personal consulting fees from Bridgebio (Eidos), Spectrum Dynamics, Pfizer, and Alnylam; member of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology board of directors. R.C.T. No relevant relationships. D.W. Consultant for Astellas, BridgeBio, Pfizer, and Alnylam advisory boards; payment for speakers bureaus work from Astellas and Pfizer; chair of ASNC Health Policy Committee; member of advisory boards of Bridge Bio and Alynylam, and grant interviewer for Ionis. Y.A.C. No relevant relationships. E.M. No relevant relationships. M.J.R. No relevant relationships. J.L.M. No relevant relationships. P.P. Consulting fees from Medtronic and AstraZeneca. M.S. No relevant relationships. T.N.B.P. No relevant relationships. Y.P. No relevant relationships. M.D. No relevant relationships. D.P. No relevant relationships. A.J.E. Support from the International Atomic Energy Agency to Columbia University; grants from GE HealthCare, Canon Medical Systems, W.L. Gore & Associates, Eidos Therapeutics, Attralus, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, and Neovasc to Columbia University; speaker’s fees from Ionetix; consulting fees from W. L. Gore & Associates; support from the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging for attending meetings and/or travel; patents planned, issued, or pending for Columbia Technology Ventures; leadership or fiduciary role in the American College of Cardiology, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging; and authorship fees from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare–UpToDate., (© 2023 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.)

Background: The extent to which health care systems have adapted to the COVID-19 pandemic to provide necessary cardiac diagnostic services is unknown., Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the pandemic on cardiac testing practices, volumes and types of diagnostic services, and perceived psychological stress to health care providers worldwide., Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing alterations from baseline in cardiovascular diagnostic care at the pandemic's onset and 1 year later. Multivariable regression was used to determine factors associated with procedure volume recovery., Results: Surveys were submitted from 669 centers in 107 countries. Worldwide reduction in cardiac procedure volumes of 64% from March 2019 to April 2020 recovered by April 2021 in high- and upper middle-income countries (recovery rates of 108% and 99%) but remained depressed in lower middle- and low-income countries (46% and 30% recovery). Although stress testing was used 12% less frequently in 2021 than in 2019, coronary computed tomographic angiography was used 14% more, a trend also seen for other advanced cardiac imaging modalities (positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance; 22%-25% increases). Pandemic-related psychological stress was estimated to have affected nearly 40% of staff, impacting patient care at 78% of sites. In multivariable regression, only lower-income status and physicians' psychological stress were significant in predicting recovery of cardiac testing., Conclusions: Cardiac diagnostic testing has yet to recover to prepandemic levels in lower-income countries. Worldwide, the decrease in standard stress testing is offset by greater use of advanced cardiac imaging modalities. Pandemic-related psychological stress among providers is widespread and associated with poor recovery of cardiac testing., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Williams is supported by the British Heart Foundation (FS/ICRF/20/26002). Dr Einstein has received speaker fees from Ionetix; has received consulting fees from W. L. Gore & Associates; has received authorship fees from Wolters Kluwer Healthcare – UpToDate; and has received grants or grants pending to his institution from Attralus, Canon Medical Systems, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Pfizer, Roche Medical Systems, W. L. Gore & Associates, and XyloCor Therapeutics. Dr Williams has received speaker fees from Canon Medical Systems. Dr Dorbala has received honoraria from Pfizer and GE Healthcare; and has received grants to her institution from Pfizer and GE Healthcare. Dr Sinitsyn has received congress speaker honoraria from Bayer, GE Healthcare, Siemens, and Philips. Dr Kudo has received research grants from Nihon Medi-physics and FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical. Dr Bucciarelli-Ducci is CEO (part-time) of the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance; and has received speaker fees from Circle Cardiovascular Imaging, Bayer, and Siemens Healthineers. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the delivery of care for cardiovascular diseases in Latin America. However, the effect of the pandemic on the cardiac diagnostic procedure volumes has not been quantified., Objective: To assess (1) the impact of COVID-19 on cardiac diagnostic volumes in Latin America and (2) determine its relationship with COVID-19 case incidence and social distancing measures., Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing changes in cardiac diagnostic volumes resulting from COVID-19. Cardiac diagnostic volumes were obtained from participating sites for March and April 2020 and compared to March 2019. Social distancing data were collected from Google COVID-19 community mobility reports and COVID-19 incidence per country from the Our World in Data., Results: Surveys were conducted in 194 centers performing cardiac diagnostic procedures, in 19 countries in Latin America. Procedure volumes decreased 36% from March 2019 to March 2020, and 82% from March 2019 to April 2020. The greatest decreases occurred in echocardiogram stress tests (91%), exercise treadmill tests (88%), and computed tomography calcium scores (87%), with slight variations between sub-regions of Latin America. Changes in social distancing patterns (p < 0.001) were more strongly associated with volume reduction than COVID-19 incidence (p = 0.003)., Conclusions: COVID-19 was associated with a significant reduction in cardiac diagnostic procedures in Latin America, which was more related to social distancing than to the COVID-19 incidence. Better balance and timing of social distancing measures and planning to maintain access to medical care is warranted during a pandemic surge, especially in regions with high cardiovascular mortality.

Background: The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic significantly affected management of cardiovascular disease around the world. The effect of the pandemic on volume of cardiovascular diagnostic procedures is not known., Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the effects of the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular diagnostic procedures and safety practices in Asia., Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey to assess changes in cardiovascular procedure volume and safety practices caused by COVID-19. Testing volumes were reported for March 2020 and April 2020 and were compared to those from March 2019. Data from 180 centers across 33 Asian countries were grouped into 4 subregions for comparison., Results: Procedure volumes decreased by 47% from March 2019 to March 2020, showing recovery from March 2020 to April 2020 in Eastern Asia, particularly in China. The majority of centers cancelled outpatient activities and increased time per study. Practice changes included implementing physical distancing and restricting visitors. Although COVID testing was not commonly performed, it was conducted in one-third of facilities in Eastern Asia. The most severe reductions in procedure volumes were observed in lower-income countries, where volumes decreased 81% from March 2019 to April 2020., Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic in Asia caused significant reductions in cardiovascular diagnostic procedures, particularly in low-income countries. Further studies on effects of COVID-19 on cardiovascular outcomes and changes in care delivery are warranted., Competing Interests: This work was supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The INCAPS-COVID study was led by the IAEA, which provided the required infrastructure for data collection. Information from participating centers was provided on a voluntary basis and no compensation was paid. The IAEA covers the cost of open access of any published manuscript. Dr Kudo has received consulting fees from Nihon mediphysics and FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical; and his institution has received grants from Nihon mediphysics and FUJIFILM Toyama Chemical, all unrelated to the current work. Dr Dorbala has received honoraria from Pfizer and GE Healthcare; and her institution has received grants from Pfizer and GE Healthcare, all unrelated to the current work. Dr Einstein has received consulting fees from W. L. Gore and Associates; has received fees for lecturing from Ionetix; and his institution has grants/grants pending from Canon Medical Systems, Eidos Therapeutics, GE Healthcare, Roche Medical Systems, W. L. Gore and Associates, and XyloCor Therapeutics, all unrelated to the current work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-U.S. institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic., Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality., Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States., Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis., Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Dr. Blankstein has previously received research support from Amgen and Astellas Inc. Dr. Ferencik has been previously supported by U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) and American Heart Association; and is a consultant for Biograph, Inc. Dr. Nørgaard has previously received unrestricted institutional research grants from Siemens and HeartFlow. Dr. Maurovich-Horvat has been a shareholder of Neumann Medical Ltd. Dr. Einstein has previously received grants from NIH, International Atomic Energy Agency, Canon Medical Systems, Roche Medical Systems, WL Gore, and GE Health care; consultant for WL Gore; on the Speakers Bureau for Ionetix; has received travel/accommodations/meeting expenses from HeartFlow; and is a stockholder in Emergent BioSolutions Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to describe worldwide variations in the use of myocardial perfusion imaging hardware, software, and imaging protocols and their impact on radiation effective dose (ED)., Background: Concerns about long-term effects of ionizing radiation have prompted efforts to identify strategies for dose optimization in myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Studies have increasingly shown opportunities for dose reduction using newer technologies and optimized protocols., Methods: Data were submitted voluntarily to the INCAPS (International Atomic Energy Agency Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Study) registry, a multinational, cross-sectional study comprising 7,911 imaging studies from 308 labs in 65 countries. The study compared regional use of camera technologies, advanced post-processing software, and protocol characteristics and analyzed the influence of each factor on ED., Results: Cadmium-zinc-telluride and positron emission tomography (PET) cameras were used in 10% (regional range 0% to 26%) and 6% (regional range 0% to 17%) of studies worldwide. Attenuation correction was used in 26% of cases (range 10% to 57%), and advanced post-processing software was used in 38% of cases (range 26% to 64%). Stress-first single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging comprised nearly 20% of cases from all world regions, except North America, where it was used in just 7% of cases. Factors associated with lower ED and odds ratio for achieving radiation dose ≤9 mSv included use of cadmium-zinc-telluride, PET, advanced post-processing software, and stress- or rest-only imaging. Overall, 39% of all studies (97% PET and 35% SPECT) were ≤9 mSv, while just 6% of all studies (32% PET and 4% SPECT) achieved a dose ≤3 mSv., Conclusions: Newer-technology cameras, advanced software, and stress-only protocols were associated with reduced ED, but worldwide adoption of these practices was generally low and varied significantly between regions. The implementation of dose-optimizing technologies and protocols offers an opportunity to reduce patient radiation exposure across all world regions., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Margaret Q. Landenberger Research Foundation (in memory of Prof. A. Donny Strosberg), and the Irving Scholars Program (to Dr. Einstein). Dr. Einstein has served as a consultant to W.L. Gore and Associates; has received an honorarium for lecturing from Ionetix; has received institutional research grants from the National Institutes of Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Canon Medical Systems, GE Healthcare, Roche Medical Systems, and W.L. Gore and Associates; and has received travel expenses unrelated to activities listed from HeartFlow. Dr. Kaufmann has received institutional research grant support from GE Healthcare. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We aimed to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiac diagnostic testing and practice and to assess its impact in different regions in Europe., Methods: The online survey organised by the International Atomic Energy Agency Division of Human Health collected information on changes in cardiac imaging procedural volumes between March 2019 and March/April 2020. Data were collected from 909 centres in 108 countries., Results: Centres in Northern and Southern Europe were more likely to cancel all outpatient activities compared with Western and Eastern Europe. There was a greater reduction in total procedure volumes in Europe compared with the rest of the world in March 2020 (45% vs 41%, p=0.003), with a more marked reduction in Southern Europe (58%), but by April 2020 this was similar in Europe and the rest of the world (69% vs 63%, p=0.261). Regional variations were apparent between imaging modalities, but the largest reductions were in Southern Europe for nearly all modalities. In March 2020, location in Southern Europe was the only independent predictor of the reduction in procedure volume. However, in April 2020, lower gross domestic product and higher COVID-19 deaths were the only independent predictors., Conclusion: The first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on care of patients with cardiac disease, with substantial regional variations in Europe. This has potential long-term implications for patients and plans are required to enable the diagnosis of non-COVID-19 conditions during the ongoing pandemic., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PM-H is a shareholder of Neumann Medical. No other authors report conflicts of interest., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: This study sought to establish worldwide and regional diagnostic reference levels (DRLs) and achievable administered activities (AAAs) for single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI)., Background: Reference levels serve as radiation dose benchmarks to compare individual laboratories against aggregated data, helping to identify sites in greatest need of dose reduction interventions. DRLs for SPECT MPI have previously been derived from national or regional registries. To date there have been no multiregional reports of DRLs for SPECT MPI from a single standardized dataset., Methods: Data were submitted voluntarily to the INCAPS (International Atomic Energy Agency Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Study), a cross-sectional, multinational registry of MPI protocols. A total of 7,103 studies were included. DRLs and AAAs were calculated by protocol for each world region and for aggregated worldwide data., Results: The aggregated worldwide DRLs for rest-stress or stress-rest studies employing technetium Tc 99m-labeled radiopharmaceuticals were 11.2 mCi (first dose) and 32.0 mCi (second dose) for 1-day protocols, and 23.0 mCi (first dose) and 24.0 mCi (second dose) for multiday protocols. Corresponding AAAs were 10.1 mCi (first dose) and 28.0 mCi (second dose) for 1-day protocols, and 17.8 mCi (first dose) and 18.7 mCi (second dose) for multiday protocols. For stress-only technetium Tc 99m studies, the worldwide DRL and AAA were 18.0 mCi and 12.5 mCi, respectively. Stress-first imaging was used in 26% to 92% of regional studies except in North America where it was used in just 7% of cases. Significant differences in DRLs and AAAs were observed between regions., Conclusions: This study reports reference levels for SPECT MPI for each major world region from one of the largest international registries of clinical MPI studies. Regional DRLs may be useful in establishing or revising guidelines or simply comparing individual laboratory protocols to regional trends. Organizations should continue to focus on establishing standardized reporting methods to improve the validity and comparability of regional DRLs., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr. Einstein’s institution has received funding for other research from Canon Medical Systems USA, Roche Medical Systems, and W. L. Gore & Associates; and he has served as a consultant to W. L. Gore & Associates. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has adversely affected diagnosis and treatment of noncommunicable diseases. Its effects on delivery of diagnostic care for cardiovascular disease, which remains the leading cause of death worldwide, have not been quantified., Objectives: The study sought to assess COVID-19's impact on global cardiovascular diagnostic procedural volumes and safety practices., Methods: The International Atomic Energy Agency conducted a worldwide survey assessing alterations in cardiovascular procedure volumes and safety practices resulting from COVID-19. Noninvasive and invasive cardiac testing volumes were obtained from participating sites for March and April 2020 and compared with those from March 2019. Availability of personal protective equipment and pandemic-related testing practice changes were ascertained., Results: Surveys were submitted from 909 inpatient and outpatient centers performing cardiac diagnostic procedures, in 108 countries. Procedure volumes decreased 42% from March 2019 to March 2020, and 64% from March 2019 to April 2020. Transthoracic echocardiography decreased by 59%, transesophageal echocardiography 76%, and stress tests 78%, which varied between stress modalities. Coronary angiography (invasive or computed tomography) decreased 55% (p < 0.001 for each procedure). In multivariable regression, significantly greater reduction in procedures occurred for centers in countries with lower gross domestic product. Location in a low-income and lower-middle-income country was associated with an additional 22% reduction in cardiac procedures and less availability of personal protective equipment and telehealth., Conclusions: COVID-19 was associated with a significant and abrupt reduction in cardiovascular diagnostic testing across the globe, especially affecting the world's economically challenged. Further study of cardiovascular outcomes and COVID-19-related changes in care delivery is warranted., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Dr. Einstein has received consulting fees from W.L. Gore and Associates; has received institutional grant support from Canon Medical Systems, GE Healthcare, Roche Medical Systems, W.L. Gore and Associates, and XyloCor Therapeutics; and has received travel/accommodations/meeting expenses from HeartFlow. Dr. Dorbala has received honoraria from Pfizer and GE Healthcare; and has received institutional research grant support from Pfizer and GE Healthcare. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has placed significant challenges on health-care systems worldwide, whether in the preparation, response, or recovery phase of the pandemic. This has been primarily managed by dramatically reducing in- and outpatient services for other diseases and implementing infection prevention and control measures. The impact of the pandemic on nuclear medicine departments and their services has not yet been established. The aim of this online survey was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on nuclear medicine departments. Methods: A web-based questionnaire, made available from April 16 to May 3, 2020, was designed to determine the impact of the pandemic on in- and outpatient nuclear medicine departments, including the number of procedures, employee health, availability of radiotracers and other essential supplies, and availability of personal protective equipment. The survey also inquired about operational aspects and types of facilities as well as other challenges. Results: A total of 434 responses from 72 countries were registered and analyzed. Respondents reported an average decline of 54% in diagnostic procedures. PET/CT scans decreased by an average of 36%, whereas sentinel lymph-node procedures decreased by 45%, lung scans by 56%, bone scans by 60%, myocardial studies by 66%, and thyroid studies by 67%. Of all participating centers, 81% performed radionuclide therapies, and they reported a reduction of 45% on average in the last 4 wk, ranging from over 76% in Latin America and South East Asia to 16% in South Korea and Singapore. Survey results showed that 52% of participating sites limited their 99m Tc/ 99 Mo generator purchases, and 12% of them temporarily cancelled orders. Insufficient supplies of essential materials (radioisotopes, generators, and kits) were reported, especially for 99m Tc/ 99 Mo generators and 131 I, particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Conclusion: Both diagnostic and therapeutic nuclear medicine procedures declined precipitously, with countries worldwide being affected by the pandemic to a similar degree. Countries that were in the postpeak phase of the pandemic when they responded to the survey, such as South Korea and Singapore, reported a less pronounced impact on nuclear medicine services; however, the overall results of the survey showed that nuclear medicine services worldwide had been significantly impacted. In relation to staff health, 15% of respondents experienced COVID-19 infections within their own departments., (© 2020 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.)

Background: A large proportion of the huge global burden of extrapulmonary tuberculosis (EPTB) cases are treated empirically without accurate definition of disease sites and extent of multi-organ disease involvement. Positron emission tomography (PET) imaging using 2-deoxy-2-(fluorine-18) fluoro-d-glucose ( 18 F-FDG) in tuberculosis could be a useful imaging technique for localising disease sites and extent of disease., Methods: We conducted a study of HIV-negative adult patients with a new clinical diagnosis of EPTB across eight centres located in six countries: India, Pakistan, Thailand, South Africa, Serbia and Bangladesh, to assess the extent of disease and common sites involved at first presentation. 18 F-FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) scans were performed within 2 weeks of presentation., Findings: 358 patients with EPTB (189 females; 169 males) were recruited over 45 months, with an age range of 18-83 years (females median 30 years; males median 38 years). 350 (98%) out of 358 patients (183 female, 167 male) had positive scans. 118 (33.7%) out of 350 had a single extrapulmonary site and 232 (66.3%) out of 350 had more than one site (organ) affected. Lymph nodes, skeleton, pleura and brain were common sites. 100 (28%) out of 358 EPTB patients had 18 F-FDG PET/CT-positive sites in the lung. 110 patients were 18 F-FDG PET/CT-positive in more body sites than were noted clinically at first presentation and 160 patients had the same number of positive body sites., Interpretation: 18 F-FDG PET/CT scan has potential for further elucidating the spectrum of disease, pathogenesis of EPTB and monitoring the effects of treatment on active lesions over time, and requires longitudinal cohort studies, twinned with biopsy and molecular studies., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J. Bomanji was the PI and received non-financial support from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: R. Sharma reports grants and non-financial support for research from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: B.R. Mittal reports grants and non-financial support for research from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: S. Gambhir reports grants and non-financial support from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: A. Qureshy reports grants and non-financial support for research from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: S.M.F. Begum reports grants and non-financial support for research from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: D. Paez has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: M. Sathekge reports grants from International Atomic Energy association (IAEA), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: M. Vorster reports grants from International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: D. Sobic Saranovic reports grants and non-financial support from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: P. Pusuwan reports grants and non-financial support for research from IAEA, Vienna, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: V. Mann reports payment for statistical software purchase from UCLH, during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: S. Vinjamuri has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A. Zumla has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: T.N.B. Pascual has nothing to disclose., (Copyright ©ERS 2020.)