UNLABELLED: PET with short inhalation of (15)O-O(2) provides regional oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) in a shorter acquisition time and with less radiation exposure than does the steady-state method. The purpose of this study was to test the accuracy of the short-inhalation technique for estimating OEF in healthy human volunteers. METHODS: The final study population included 16 healthy volunteers, who underwent a series of dynamic PET scans consisting of short inhalation of (15)O-CO, short inhalation of (15)O-O(2), and a bolus infusion of (15)O-H(2)O to generate parametric images for cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), OEF, and metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO(2)). About 45 min before PET emission scanning, arterial and jugular blood was sampled through a catheter inserted in a radial artery and the right jugular bulb, respectively. PET-derived OEF (OEFpet) of the whole brain was compared with OEF calculated from the arteriovenous blood-sampling technique (OEFav). RESULTS: Whole-brain-averaged CBF (mean +/- SD) measured with PET was 0.40 +/- 0.06 (range, 0.30-0.55) mL/g/min, CBV was 0.05 +/- 0.01 (range, 0.04-0.09) mL/g, CMRO(2) was 2.85 +/- 0.39 (range, 2.35-3.84) mL/100 g/min, and OEFpet was 0.39 +/- 0.06 (range, 0.30-0.51). OEFpet showed a slightly higher value than did OEFav (0.36 +/- 0.05 [range, 0.29-0.46]), but the difference was not significant. The difference in the 2 measurements (OEFpet - OEFav) did not correlate with CBF (r = -0.16; P = not statistically significant [NS]), CBV (r = -0.20; P = NS), CMRO(2) (r = -0.16; P = NS), partial arterial oxygen pressure (r = 0.29; P = NS) or partial arterial carbon dioxide pressure (r = -0.17; P = NS). CONCLUSION: Compared with the arteriovenous blood-sampling technique, a technique using short inhalation of (15)O-O(2) did not significantly over- or underestimate global OEF in healthy human volunteers. The PET technique reasonably estimated the cerebral OEF in local brain tissues of healthy human volunteers.
UNLABELLED: PET with short inhalation of (15)O-O(2) provides regional oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) in a shorter acquisition time and with less radiation exposure than does the steady-state method. The purpose of this study was to test the accuracy of the short-inhalation technique for estimating OEF in healthy human volunteers. METHODS: The final study population included 16 healthy volunteers, who underwent a series of dynamic PET scans consisting of short inhalation of (15)O-CO, short inhalation of (15)O-O(2), and a bolus infusion of (15)O-H(2)O to generate parametric images for cerebral blood volume (CBV), cerebral blood flow (CBF), OEF, and metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO(2)). About 45 min before PET emission scanning, arterial and jugular blood was sampled through a catheter inserted in a radial artery and the right jugular bulb, respectively. PET-derived OEF (OEFpet) of the whole brain was compared with OEF calculated from the arteriovenous blood-sampling technique (OEFav). RESULTS: Whole-brain-averaged CBF (mean +/- SD) measured with PET was 0.40 +/- 0.06 (range, 0.30-0.55) mL/g/min, CBV was 0.05 +/- 0.01 (range, 0.04-0.09) mL/g, CMRO(2) was 2.85 +/- 0.39 (range, 2.35-3.84) mL/100 g/min, and OEFpet was 0.39 +/- 0.06 (range, 0.30-0.51). OEFpet showed a slightly higher value than did OEFav (0.36 +/- 0.05 [range, 0.29-0.46]), but the difference was not significant. The difference in the 2 measurements (OEFpet - OEFav) did not correlate with CBF (r = -0.16; P = not statistically significant [NS]), CBV (r = -0.20; P = NS), CMRO(2) (r = -0.16; P = NS), partial arterial oxygen pressure (r = 0.29; P = NS) or partial arterial carbon dioxide pressure (r = -0.17; P = NS). CONCLUSION: Compared with the arteriovenous blood-sampling technique, a technique using short inhalation of (15)O-O(2) did not significantly over- or underestimate global OEF in healthy human volunteers. The PET technique reasonably estimated the cerebral OEF in local brain tissues of healthy human volunteers.
Authors: Audrey P Fan; Berkin Bilgic; Louis Gagnon; Thomas Witzel; Himanshu Bhat; Bruce R Rosen; Elfar Adalsteinsson Journal: Magn Reson Med Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 4.668