Clinical PET Myocardial Perfusion Imaging and Flow Quantification

Cardiology Clinics

Volumn 34, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 69-85

  Juneau, Daniel ^a   Erthal, Fernanda ^a   Ohira, Hiroshi ^a,b   Mc Ardle, Brian ^a   Hessian, Renée ^a   deKemp, Robert A ^a   Beanlands, Rob S B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA HEART INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b HOKKAIDO UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

Author keywords

Flow quantification; Myocardial blood flow; Myocardial flow reserve; Myocardial perfusion imaging; N 13 ammonia; PET; Rubidium 82

Indexed keywords

AMMONIA N 13; FLURPIRIDAZ F 18; O 15 WATER; RUBIDIUM 82; TRACER; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ACCURACY; ARTIFACT; BLOOD FLOW; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; CORONARY ARTERY OBSTRUCTION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG HALF LIFE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; PHASE 3 CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SINGLE PHOTON EMISSION COMPUTER TOMOGRAPHY; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE;

CLINICAL DECISION-MAKING; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY CIRCULATION; HUMANS; MULTIMODAL IMAGING; MYOCARDIAL PERFUSION IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;

EID: 84947461035     PISSN: 07338651     EISSN: 15582264     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccl.2015.07.013     Document Type: Review

References (60)

1. Gould K.L., Schelbert H.R., Phelps M.E., et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stenoses with myocardial perfusion imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilatation. V. Detection of 47 percent diameter coronary stenosis with intravenous nitrogen-13 ammonia and emission-computed tomography in intact dogs. Am J Cardiol 1979, 43(2):200-208.
2. Schelbert H.R., Phelps M.E., Hoffman E.J., et al. Regional myocardial perfusion assessed with N-13 labeled ammonia and positron emission computerized axial tomography. Am J Cardiol 1979, 43(2):209-218.
3. Cherry S.R. Physics in nuclear medicine 2012, Elsevier/Saunders, Philadelphia. 4th edition.
4. Maddahi J. Properties of an ideal PET perfusion tracer: new PET tracer cases and data. J Nucl Cardiol 2012, 19(Suppl 1):S30-S37.
5. Senthamizhchelvan S., Bravo P.E., Lodge M.A., et al. Radiation dosimetry of 82Rb in humans under pharmacologic stress. J Nucl Med 2011, 52(3):485-491.
6. Hunter C.R., Hill J., Ziadi M.C., et al. Biodistribution and radiation dosimetry of 82Rb at rest and during peak pharmacological stress in patients referred for myocardial perfusion imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2015, 42(7):1032-1042.
7. Chow B.J., Ananthasubramaniam K., dekemp R.A., et al. Comparison of treadmill exercise versus dipyridamole stress with myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005, 45(8):1227-1234.
8. Klein R., Adler A., Beanlands R.S., et al. Precision-controlled elution of a 82Sr/82Rb generator for cardiac perfusion imaging with positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol 2007, 52(3):659-673.
9. Lortie M., Beanlands R.S., Yoshinaga K., et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb dynamic PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2007, 34(11):1765-1774.
10. Nesterov S.V., Deshayes E., Sciagrà R., et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow in absolute terms using (82)Rb PET imaging: the RUBY-10 Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2014, 7(11):1119-1127.
11. Chow B.J.W., Beanlands R.S., Lee A., et al. Treadmill exercise produces larger perfusion defects than dipyridamole stress N-13 ammonia positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 47(2):411-416.
12. Beanlands R.S., Muzik O., Hutchins G.D., et al. Heterogeneity of regional nitrogen 13-labeled ammonia tracer distribution in the normal human heart: comparison with rubidium 82 and copper 62-labeled PTSM. J Nucl Cardiol 1994, 1(3):225-235.
13. Maddahi J, Udelson J, Heller G, et al; on behalf of the Flurpiridaz F18 Study 301 Investigators. Flurpiridaz F18 PET MPI: recent clinical trial data; International Congress of Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT 12 [abstract]. Madrid (Spain), May 3-5, 2015. p. 23.
14. Yu M., Nekolla S.G., Schwaiger M., et al. The next generation of cardiac positron emission tomography imaging agents: discovery of flurpiridaz F-18 for detection of coronary disease. Semin Nucl Med 2011, 41(4):305-313.
15. Packard R.R., Huang S.C., Dahlbom M., et al. Absolute quantitation of myocardial blood flow in human subjects with or without myocardial ischemia using dynamic flurpiridaz F 18 PET. J Nucl Med 2014, 55(9):1438-1444.
16. Renaud J.M., Mylonas I., McArdle B., et al. Clinical interpretation standards and quality assurance for the multicenter PET/CT trial rubidium-ARMI. J Nucl Med 2014, 55(1):58-64.
17. Dilsizian V., Bacharach S.L., Beanlands R.S., et al. PET myocardial perfusion and metabolism clinical imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2009, 16(4):651.
18. Kaster T.S., Dwivedi G., Susser L., et al. Single low-dose CT scan optimized for rest-stress PET attenuation correction and quantification of coronary artery calcium. J Nucl Cardiol 2015, 22(3):419-428.
19. Case J.A., Bateman T.M. Taking the perfect nuclear image: quality control, acquisition, and processing techniques for cardiac SPECT, PET, and hybrid imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2013, 20(5):891-907.
20. Nakazato R., Dey D., Alexánderson E., et al. Automatic alignment of myocardial perfusion PET and 64-slice coronary CT angiography on hybrid PET/CT. J Nucl Cardiol 2012, 19(3):482-491.
21. Wells R.G., Ruddy T.D., DeKemp R.A., et al. Single-phase CT aligned to gated PET for respiratory motion correction in cardiac PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2010, 51(8):1182-1190.
22. Cerqueira M.D., Weissman N.J., Dilsizian V., et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2002, 18(1):539-542.
23. Mc Ardle B, Renaud J, DeKemp R, et al. Role of PET in diagnosis and risk assessment in patients with known or suspected CAD. In: Iskandrian A, Garcia E, editors. Nuclear cardiac imaging. 5th edition. Oxford University Press, in press.
24. Yoshinaga K., Chow B.J., Williams K., et al. What is the prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging using Rubidium-82 positron emission tomography?. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006, 48(5):1029-1039.
25. Dorbala S., Di Carli M.F., Beanlands R.S., et al. Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013, 61(2):176-184.
26. Shi H., Santana C.A., Rivero A., et al. Normal values and prospective validation of transient ischaemic dilation index in 82Rb PET myocardial perfusion imaging. Nucl Med Commun 2007, 28(11):859-863.
27. Lertsburapa K., Ahlberg A.W., Bateman T.M., et al. Independent and incremental prognostic value of left ventricular ejection fraction determined by stress gated rubidium 82 PET imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2008, 15(6):745-753.
28. Dorbala S., Vangala D., Sampson U., et al. Value of vasodilator left ventricular ejection fraction reserve in evaluating the magnitude of myocardium at risk and the extent of angiographic coronary artery disease: a 82Rb PET/CT study. J Nucl Med 2007, 48(3):349-358.
29. Abraham A., Kass M., Ruddy T.D., et al. Right and left ventricular uptake with Rb-82 PET myocardial perfusion imaging: markers of left main or 3 vessel disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2010, 17(1):52-60.
30. Kaster T., Mylonas I., Renaud J.M., et al. Accuracy of low-dose rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease using 3D PET and normal database interpretation. J Nucl Cardiol 2012, 19(6):1135-1145.
31. Nakazato R., Berman D.S., Dey D., et al. Automated quantitative Rb-82 3D PET/CT myocardial perfusion imaging: normal limits and correlation with invasive coronary angiography. J Nucl Cardiol 2012, 19(2):265-276.
32. Mc Ardle B.A., Dowsley T.F., deKemp R.A., et al. Does rubidium-82 PET have superior accuracy to SPECT perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary disease?: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012, 60(18):1828-1837.
33. Parker M.W., Iskandar A., Limone B., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of cardiac positron emission tomography versus single photon emission computed tomography for coronary artery disease: a bivariate meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012, 5(6):700-707.
34. Dorbala S., Di Carli M.F. Cardiac PET perfusion: prognosis, risk stratification, and clinical management. Semin Nucl Med 2014, 44(5):344-357.
35. Dorbala S., Hachamovitch R., Curillova Z., et al. Incremental prognostic value of gated Rb-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging over clinical variables and rest LVEF. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2009, 2(7):846-854.
36. Kay J., Dorbala S., Goyal A., et al. Influence of sex on risk stratification with stress myocardial perfusion Rb-82 positron emission tomography: results from the PET (Positron Emission Tomography) Prognosis Multicenter Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013, 62(20):1866-1876.
37. Chow B.J.W., Dorbala S., Di Carli M.F., et al. Prognostic value of PET myocardial perfusion imaging in obese patients. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2014, 7(3):278-287.
38. Hachamovitch R., Hayes S.W., Friedman J.D., et al. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 2003, 107(23):2900-2907.
39. Hachamovitch R., Rozanski A., Shaw L.J., et al. Impact of ischaemia and scar on the therapeutic benefit derived from myocardial revascularization vs. medical therapy among patients undergoing stress-rest myocardial perfusion scintigraphy. Eur Heart J 2011, 32(8):1012-1024.
40. Patel M.R., Dehmer G.J., Hirshfeld J.W., et al. ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/SCCT 2012 appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization focused update: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012, 59(9):857-881.
41. Patel M.R., Bailey S.R., Bonow R.O., et al. ACCF/SCAI/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2012 appropriate Use criteria for diagnostic Catheterization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Failure Society of America, Heart Rhythm Society, Society of Critical Care Medicine, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012, 59(22):1995-2027.
42. Kaufmann P.A., Camici P.G. Myocardial blood flow measurement by PET: technical aspects and clinical applications. J Nucl Med 2005, 46(1):75-88.
43. Gould K.L., Johnson N.P., Bateman T.M., et al. Anatomic versus physiologic assessment of coronary artery disease. Role of coronary flow reserve, fractional flow reserve, and positron emission tomography imaging in revascularization decision-making. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013, 62(18):1639-1653.
44. Johnson N.P., Kirkeeide R.L., Gould K.L. Is discordance of coronary flow reserve and fractional flow reserve due to methodology or clinically relevant coronary pathophysiology?. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012, 5(2):193-202.
45. Lima R.S.L., Watson D.D., Goode A.R., et al. Incremental value of combined perfusion and function over perfusion alone by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of severe three-vessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003, 42(1):64-70.
46. Parkash R., deKemp R.A., Ruddy T.D., et al. Potential utility of rubidium 82 PET quantification in patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol 2004, 11(4):440-449.
47. Ziadi M.C., deKemp R.A., Williams K., et al. Does quantification of myocardial flow reserve using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography facilitate detection of multivessel coronary artery disease?. J Nucl Cardiol 2012, 19(4):670-680.
48. Schelbert H.R. Quantification of myocardial blood flow: what is the clinical role?. Cardiol Clin 2009, 27(2):277-289. [Table of Contents].
49. Camici P.G., Crea F. Coronary microvascular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2007, 356(8):830-840.
50. Ohira H., Dowsley T., Dwivedi G., et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow using PET to improve the management of patients with stable ischemic coronary artery disease. Future Cardiol 2014, 10(5):611-631.
51. Ziadi M.C., Dekemp R.A., Williams K.A., et al. Impaired myocardial flow reserve on rubidium-82 positron emission tomography imaging predicts adverse outcomes in patients assessed for myocardial ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011, 58(7):740-748.
52. Murthy V.L., Naya M., Foster C.R., et al. Improved cardiac risk assessment with noninvasive measures of coronary flow reserve. Circulation 2011, 124(20):2215-2224.
53. Cecchi F., Olivotto I., Gistri R., et al. Coronary microvascular dysfunction and prognosis in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2003, 349(11):1027-1035.
54. Neglia D., Michelassi C., Trivieri M.G., et al. Prognostic role of myocardial blood flow impairment in idiopathic left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation 2002, 105(2):186-193.
55. Geltman E.M., Henes C.G., Senneff M.J., et al. Increased myocardial perfusion at rest and diminished perfusion reserve in patients with angina and angiographically normal coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol 1990, 16(3):586-595.
56. Mc Ardle B.A., Davies R.A., Chen L., et al. Prognostic value of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography in patients after heart transplant. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2014, 7(6):930-937.
57. Herzog B.A., Husmann L., Valenta I., et al. Long-term prognostic value of 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography added value of coronary flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009, 54(2):150-156.
58. Beanlands R., Heller G.V. Proceedings of the ASNC cardiac PET summit, 12 May 2014, Baltimore, MD: 1: the value of PET: integrating cardiovascular PET into the care continuum. J Nucl Cardiol 2015, 22(3):557-562.
59. Heller G.V., Bateman T.M., Cerqueira M.D., et al. Proceedings of the ASNC cardiac PET summit, 12 May 2014, Baltimore, MD, quantitation of myocardial blood flow. J Nucl Cardiol 2015, 22(3):555-556.
60. Kajander S., Joutsiniemi E., Saraste M., et al. Cardiac positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging accurately detects anatomically and functionally significant coronary artery disease. Circulation 2010, 122(6):603-613.