PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether ECG-triggered coronary calcium scoring (CCS) scans can be used for attenuation correction (AC) to quantify myocardial blood flow (MBF) and coronary flow reserve (CFR) assessed by PET/CT with (13)N-ammonia. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients underwent a (13)N-ammonia PET/CT scan at rest and during standard adenosine stress. MBF values were calculated using AC maps obtained from the ECG-triggered CCS scan during inspiration and validated against MBF values calculated using standard non-gated transmission scans for AC. CFR was calculated as the ratio of hyperaemic over resting MBF. In all 35 consecutive patients intraobserver variability was assessed by blinded repeat analysis for both AC methods. RESULTS: There was an excellent correlation between CT AC and CCS for global MBF values at rest (n = 35, r = 0.94, p < 0.001) and during stress (n = 35, r = 0.97, p < 0.001) with narrow Bland-Altman (BA) limits of agreement (-0.21 to 0.10 ml/min per g and -0.41 to 0.30 ml/min per g) as well as for global CFR (n = 35, r = 0.96, p < 0.001, BA -0.27 to 0.34). The excellent correlation was preserved on the segmental MBF analysis for both rest and stress (n = 1190, r = 0.93, p < 0.001, BA -0.60 to 0.50) and for CFR (n = 595, r = 0.87, p < 0.001, BA -0.71 to 0.74). In addition, reproducibility proved excellent for global CFR by CT AC (n = 35, r = 0.91, p < 0.001, BA -0.42-0.58) and CCS scans (n = 35, r = 0.94, p < 0.001, BA -0.34-0.45). CONCLUSION: Use of attenuation maps from CCS scans allows accurate quantitative MBF and CFR assessment with (13)N-ammonia PET/CT.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether ECG-triggered coronary calcium scoring (CCS) scans can be used for attenuation correction (AC) to quantify myocardial blood flow (MBF) and coronary flow reserve (CFR) assessed by PET/CT with (13)N-ammonia. METHODS: Thirty-five consecutive patients underwent a (13)N-ammonia PET/CT scan at rest and during standard adenosine stress. MBF values were calculated using AC maps obtained from the ECG-triggered CCS scan during inspiration and validated against MBF values calculated using standard non-gated transmission scans for AC. CFR was calculated as the ratio of hyperaemic over resting MBF. In all 35 consecutive patients intraobserver variability was assessed by blinded repeat analysis for both AC methods. RESULTS: There was an excellent correlation between CT AC and CCS for global MBF values at rest (n = 35, r = 0.94, p < 0.001) and during stress (n = 35, r = 0.97, p < 0.001) with narrow Bland-Altman (BA) limits of agreement (-0.21 to 0.10 ml/min per g and -0.41 to 0.30 ml/min per g) as well as for global CFR (n = 35, r = 0.96, p < 0.001, BA -0.27 to 0.34). The excellent correlation was preserved on the segmental MBF analysis for both rest and stress (n = 1190, r = 0.93, p < 0.001, BA -0.60 to 0.50) and for CFR (n = 595, r = 0.87, p < 0.001, BA -0.71 to 0.74). In addition, reproducibility proved excellent for global CFR by CT AC (n = 35, r = 0.91, p < 0.001, BA -0.42-0.58) and CCS scans (n = 35, r = 0.94, p < 0.001, BA -0.34-0.45). CONCLUSION: Use of attenuation maps from CCS scans allows accurate quantitative MBF and CFR assessment with (13)N-ammonia PET/CT.
Authors: Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-01-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: G D Hutchins; M Schwaiger; K C Rosenspire; J Krivokapich; H Schelbert; D E Kuhl Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1990-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: T R DeGrado; M W Hanson; T G Turkington; D M Delong; D A Brezinski; J P Vallée; L W Hedlund; J Zhang; F Cobb; M J Sullivan; R E Coleman Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 1996 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Robert Detrano; Alan D Guerci; J Jeffrey Carr; Diane E Bild; Gregory Burke; Aaron R Folsom; Kiang Liu; Steven Shea; Moyses Szklo; David A Bluemke; Daniel H O'Leary; Russell Tracy; Karol Watson; Nathan D Wong; Richard A Kronmal Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C Burger; G Goerres; S Schoenes; A Buck; A H R Lonn; G K Von Schulthess Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2002-04-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Thomas H Schindler; Xiao-Li Zhang; John O Prior; Jerson Cadenas; Magnus Dahlbom; James Sayre; Heinrich R Schelbert Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2007-03-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: J Schaap; R M Kauling; S M Boekholdt; M C Post; J A Van der Heyden; T L de Kroon; B J W M Rensing; J F Verzijlbergen Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Tobias A Fuchs; Jelena R Ghadri; Julia Stehli; Catherine Gebhard; Egle Kazakauskaite; Bernd Klaeser; Oliver Gaemperli; Michael Fiechter; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-08-28 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Tobias A Fuchs; Julia Stehli; Svetlana Dougoud; Bert-Ram Sah; Sacha Bull; Olivier F Clerc; Mathias Possner; Ronny R Buechel; Oliver Gaemperli; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Tyler S Kaster; Girish Dwivedi; Leah Susser; Jennifer M Renaud; Rob S B Beanlands; Benjamin J W Chow; Robert A deKemp Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jeroen Schaap; Robert M Kauling; S Matthijs Boekholdt; Martijn C Post; Jan A Van der Heyden; Thom L de Kroon; H Wouter van Es; Benno J W M Rensing; J Fred Verzijlbergen Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2012-08-18 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Hein J Verberne; Wanda Acampa; Constantinos Anagnostopoulos; Jim Ballinger; Frank Bengel; Pieter De Bondt; Ronny R Buechel; Alberto Cuocolo; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit; Albert Flotats; Marcus Hacker; Cecilia Hindorf; Philip A Kaufmann; Oliver Lindner; Michael Ljungberg; Markus Lonsdale; Alain Manrique; David Minarik; Arthur J H A Scholte; Riemer H J A Slart; Elin Trägårdh; Tim C de Wit; Birger Hesse Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-08-21 Impact factor: 9.236