BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the quality of nitrogen 13-labeled ammonia (NH(3)) perfusion data from coincidence-capable gamma camera positron emission tomography (GC-PET) systems compared with that from full-ring positron emission tomography (FR-PET). METHODS AND RESULTS: The performance parameters of the GC-PET system were examined and found adequate for imaging at the activity levels used clinically. We studied 15 patients who underwent stress and rest N-13-labeled NH(3) perfusion imaging on FR-PET and GC-PET systems. Quantitative analysis of perfusion values showed that GC-PET uptake was significantly lower than FR-PET uptake in 67.6% of segments. Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference between FR-PET and GC-PET values was from 5.3% to 5.9%. Stress FR-PET identified 49 segments as having impaired perfusion, 46 (93.9%) of which were also identified by GC-PET. Fifty-six additional segments were identified as abnormal by GC-PET. These findings indicated a general overestimation of defect size on GC-PET. Analysis of the degree of perfusion reduction also found that GC-PET tended to overestimate defect contrast. These findings are similar to those previously found by workers examining fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Good concordance was shown between GC-PET and FR-PET systems for N-13-labeled NH(3) perfusion imaging, although further work is required to optimize the technique.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the quality of nitrogen 13-labeled ammonia (NH(3)) perfusion data from coincidence-capable gamma camera positron emission tomography (GC-PET) systems compared with that from full-ring positron emission tomography (FR-PET). METHODS AND RESULTS: The performance parameters of the GC-PET system were examined and found adequate for imaging at the activity levels used clinically. We studied 15 patients who underwent stress and rest N-13-labeled NH(3) perfusion imaging on FR-PET and GC-PET systems. Quantitative analysis of perfusion values showed that GC-PET uptake was significantly lower than FR-PET uptake in 67.6% of segments. Bland-Altman analysis showed that the mean difference between FR-PET and GC-PET values was from 5.3% to 5.9%. Stress FR-PET identified 49 segments as having impaired perfusion, 46 (93.9%) of which were also identified by GC-PET. Fifty-six additional segments were identified as abnormal by GC-PET. These findings indicated a general overestimation of defect size on GC-PET. Analysis of the degree of perfusion reduction also found that GC-PET tended to overestimate defect contrast. These findings are similar to those previously found by workers examining fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Good concordance was shown between GC-PET and FR-PET systems for N-13-labeled NH(3) perfusion imaging, although further work is required to optimize the technique.
Authors: Y D'Asseler; S Vandenberghe; F D Winter; R Van de Walle ; M Koole; L Bouwens; I Lemahieu; R A Dierckx Journal: Comput Med Imaging Graph Date: 2001 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.790
Authors: J vom Dahl; C Altehoefer; F H Sheehan; P Buechin; G Schulz; E R Schwarz; K C Koch; R Uebis; B J Messmer; U Buell; P Hanrath Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: G Srinivasan; A N Kitsiou; S L Bacharach; M L Bartlett; C Miller-Davis; V Dilsizian Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-03-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: G Lucignani; G Paolini; C Landoni; M Zuccari; G Paganelli; L Galli; G Di Credico; G Vanoli; C Rossetti; M A Mariani Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Date: 1992
Authors: J Tillisch; R Brunken; R Marshall; M Schwaiger; M Mandelkern; M Phelps; H Schelbert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1986-04-03 Impact factor: 91.245