Coronary disease & ACSCohort study

Real-World Comparison of Cardiac MRI and Nuclear Perfusion Imaging for Myocardial Scar Detection

JACC AdvPublished

  • retrospective single-center study

Authors' conclusion

MPI detected myocardial scar less frequently than CMR-LGE, with PET providing greater specificity than SPECT for ischemic and transmural scar. Combined LGE and FPD identified patients at highest risk of adverse outcomes, supporting PET MPI for myocardial scar characterization.

Study context

Population
Patients undergoing contrast CMR and nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) within 1 year; patients with myocardial infarction or revascularization between studies excludedper MPI modality · SPECTAC 328 · SPECTNoAC 246 · PET 240
Participants
328 / 246 / 240
Exposure
Myocardial scar detection by fixed perfusion defects (FPD) on nuclear MPI vs cardiovascular magnetic resonance late gadolinium enhancement (CMR-LGE)
  • SPECTACn = 328
  • SPECTNoACn = 246
  • PETn = 240

Main finding

As reported in the abstract

Scar detection

LGE present (predominantly nonischemic)

354 patients (43%)

Scar detected by nuclear MPI

30%

Observational data: associations, not effects.

Further findings

OutcomeHR (95% CI)P value
MACE · higher MACE risk with both LGE and FPD4.95 (3.01–8.11)P < 0.001

Nuclear scar and ischemic LGE

Association of nuclear scar with ischemic LGE, OR (95% CI 3.64-9.43; P < 0.001)
5.86
Not associated with nonischemic LGE

Specificity for ischemic and ≥50% transmural LGE

PET higher specificity than single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)
P < 0.01

MBFMin

≥50% transmural LGE vs not (lower with ≥50% transmural LGE)
0.61 [0.53-0.68] vs 0.80 [0.74-0.85] mL/min/g; P < 0.001

Original publication

Real-World Comparison of Cardiac MRI and Nuclear Perfusion Imaging for Myocardial Scar Detection. JACC Adv. Published 5 October 2026. doi:10.1016/j.jacadv.2026.103303

Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it