Literature DB >> 21934541

Combining dynamic and ECG-gated ⁸²Rb-PET for practical implementation in the clinic.

George A Sayre1, Stephen L Bacharach, Michael W Dae, Youngho Seo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: For many cardiac clinics, list-mode PET is impractical. Therefore, separate dynamic and ECG-gated acquisitions are needed to detect harmful stenoses, indicate affected coronary arteries, and estimate stenosis severity. However, physicians usually order gated studies only because of dose, time, and cost limitations. These gated studies are limited to detection. In an effort to remove these limitations, we developed a novel curve-fitting algorithm [incomplete data (ICD)] to accurately calculate coronary flow reserve (CFR) from a combined dynamic-ECG protocol of a length equal to a typical gated scan.
METHODS: We selected several retrospective dynamic studies to simulate shortened dynamic acquisitions of the combined protocol and compared (a) the accuracy of ICD and a nominal method in extrapolating the complete functional form of arterial input functions (AIFs); and (b) the accuracy of ICD and ICD-AP (ICD with a-posteriori knowledge of complete-data AIFs) in predicting CFRs.
RESULTS: According to the Akaike information criterion, AIFs predicted by ICD were more accurate than those predicted by the nominal method in 11 out of 12 studies. CFRs predicted by ICD and ICD-AP were similar to complete-data predictions (PICD=0.94 and PICD-AP=0.91) and had similar average errors (eICD=2.82% and eICD-AP=2.79%).
CONCLUSION: According to a nuclear cardiologist and an expert analyst of PET data, both ICD and ICD-AP predicted CFR values with sufficient accuracy for the clinic. Therefore, by using our method, physicians in cardiac clinics would have access to the necessary amount of information to differentiate between single-vessel and triple-vessel disease for treatment decision making.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 21934541      PMCID: PMC3227790          DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e32834c13b5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Commun        ISSN: 0143-3636            Impact factor:   1.690


  20 in total

Review 1.  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.

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

2.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights.

Authors:  Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Simon Farrell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-02

3.  ACC/AHA 2004 guideline update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery).

Authors:  Kim A Eagle; Robert A Guyton; Ravin Davidoff; Fred H Edwards; Gordon A Ewy; Timothy J Gardner; James C Hart; Howard C Herrmann; L David Hillis; Adolph M Hutter; Bruce Whitney Lytle; Robert A Marlow; William C Nugent; Thomas A Orszulak; Elliott M Antman; Sidney C Smith; Joseph S Alpert; Jeffrey L Anderson; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Raymond J Gibbons; Gabriel Gregoratos; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Alice K Jacobs; Joseph P Ornato
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 4.  Diagnostic and prognostic value of non-invasive imaging in known or suspected coronary artery disease.

Authors:  J D Schuijf; D Poldermans; L J Shaw; J W Jukema; H J Lamb; A de Roos; W Wijns; E E van der Wall; J J Bax
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories.

Authors:  P W Wilson; R B D'Agostino; D Levy; A M Belanger; H Silbershatz; W B Kannel
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1998-05-12       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Evaluation of two population-based input functions for quantitative neurological FDG PET studies.

Authors:  S Eberl; A R Anayat; R R Fulton; P K Hooper; M J Fulham
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1997-03

Review 7.  Clinical cardiac PET using generator-produced Rb-82: a review.

Authors:  K L Gould
Journal:  Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol       Date:  1989 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.740

8.  Early detection of abnormal coronary flow reserve in asymptomatic men at high risk for coronary artery disease using positron emission tomography.

Authors:  F Dayanikli; D Grambow; O Muzik; L Mosca; M Rubenfire; M Schwaiger
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1994-08       Impact factor: 29.690

9.  Models for computer simulation studies of input functions for tracer kinetic modeling with positron emission tomography.

Authors:  D Feng; S C Huang; X Wang
Journal:  Int J Biomed Comput       Date:  1993-03

10.  Potential utility of rubidium 82 PET quantification in patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  R Parkash; R A deKemp; T D Ruddy; A Kitsikis; R Hart; L Beauchesne; L Beauschene; Kathryn Williams; R A Davies; M Labinaz; R S B Beanlands
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.