PURPOSE: Quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) with generator-produced (82)Rb is an attractive alternative for centres without an on-site cyclotron. Our aim was to validate (82)Rb-measured MBF in relation to that measured using (15)O-water, as a tracer 100% of which can be extracted from the circulation even at high flow rates, in healthy control subject and patients with mild coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: MBF was measured at rest and during adenosine-induced hyperaemia with (82)Rb and (15)O-water PET in 33 participants (22 control subjects, aged 30 ± 13 years; 11 CAD patients without transmural infarction, aged 60 ± 13 years). A one-tissue compartment (82)Rb model with ventricular spillover correction was used. The (82)Rb flow-dependent extraction rate was derived from (15)O-water measurements in a subset of 11 control subjects. Myocardial flow reserve (MFR) was defined as the hyperaemic/rest MBF. Pearson's correlation r, Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and Lin's concordance correlation ρ (c) (measuring both precision and accuracy) were used. RESULTS: Over the entire MBF range (0.66-4.7 ml/min/g), concordance was excellent for MBF (r = 0.90, [(82)Rb-(15)O-water] mean difference ± SD = 0.04 ± 0.66 ml/min/g, LoA = -1.26 to 1.33 ml/min/g, ρ(c) = 0.88) and MFR (range 1.79-5.81, r = 0.83, mean difference = 0.14 ± 0.58, LoA = -0.99 to 1.28, ρ(c) = 0.82). Hyperaemic MBF was reduced in CAD patients compared with the subset of 11 control subjects (2.53 ± 0.74 vs. 3.62 ± 0.68 ml/min/g, p = 0.002, for (15)O-water; 2.53 ± 1.01 vs. 3.82 ± 1.21 ml/min/g, p = 0.013, for (82)Rb) and this was paralleled by a lower MFR (2.65 ± 0.62 vs. 3.79 ± 0.98, p = 0.004, for (15)O-water; 2.85 ± 0.91 vs. 3.88 ± 0.91, p = 0.012, for (82)Rb). Myocardial perfusion was homogeneous in 1,114 of 1,122 segments (99.3%) and there were no differences in MBF among the coronary artery territories (p > 0.31). CONCLUSION: Quantification of MBF with (82)Rb with a newly derived correction for the nonlinear extraction function was validated against MBF measured using (15)O-water in control subjects and patients with mild CAD, where it was found to be accurate at high flow rates. (82)Rb-derived MBF estimates seem robust for clinical research, advancing a step further towards its implementation in clinical routine.
PURPOSE: Quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF) with generator-produced (82)Rb is an attractive alternative for centres without an on-site cyclotron. Our aim was to validate (82)Rb-measured MBF in relation to that measured using (15)O-water, as a tracer 100% of which can be extracted from the circulation even at high flow rates, in healthy control subject and patients with mild coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: MBF was measured at rest and during adenosine-induced hyperaemia with (82)Rb and (15)O-water PET in 33 participants (22 control subjects, aged 30 ± 13 years; 11 CAD patients without transmural infarction, aged 60 ± 13 years). A one-tissue compartment (82)Rb model with ventricular spillover correction was used. The (82)Rb flow-dependent extraction rate was derived from (15)O-water measurements in a subset of 11 control subjects. Myocardial flow reserve (MFR) was defined as the hyperaemic/rest MBF. Pearson's correlation r, Bland-Altman 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and Lin's concordance correlation ρ (c) (measuring both precision and accuracy) were used. RESULTS: Over the entire MBF range (0.66-4.7 ml/min/g), concordance was excellent for MBF (r = 0.90, [(82)Rb-(15)O-water] mean difference ± SD = 0.04 ± 0.66 ml/min/g, LoA = -1.26 to 1.33 ml/min/g, ρ(c) = 0.88) and MFR (range 1.79-5.81, r = 0.83, mean difference = 0.14 ± 0.58, LoA = -0.99 to 1.28, ρ(c) = 0.82). Hyperaemic MBF was reduced in CAD patients compared with the subset of 11 control subjects (2.53 ± 0.74 vs. 3.62 ± 0.68 ml/min/g, p = 0.002, for (15)O-water; 2.53 ± 1.01 vs. 3.82 ± 1.21 ml/min/g, p = 0.013, for (82)Rb) and this was paralleled by a lower MFR (2.65 ± 0.62 vs. 3.79 ± 0.98, p = 0.004, for (15)O-water; 2.85 ± 0.91 vs. 3.88 ± 0.91, p = 0.012, for (82)Rb). Myocardial perfusion was homogeneous in 1,114 of 1,122 segments (99.3%) and there were no differences in MBF among the coronary artery territories (p > 0.31). CONCLUSION: Quantification of MBF with (82)Rb with a newly derived correction for the nonlinear extraction function was validated against MBF measured using (15)O-water in control subjects and patients with mild CAD, where it was found to be accurate at high flow rates. (82)Rb-derived MBF estimates seem robust for clinical research, advancing a step further towards its implementation in clinical routine.
Authors: K L Gould; R A Goldstein; N A Mullani; R L Kirkeeide; W H Wong; T J Tewson; M S Berridge; L A Bolomey; R K Hartz; R W Smalling Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1986-04 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Jonathan B Moody; Keri M Hiller; Benjamin C Lee; Alexis Poitrasson-Rivière; James R Corbett; Richard L Weinberg; Venkatesh L Murthy; Edward P Ficaro Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2019-02-26 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jonathan B Moody; Benjamin C Lee; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Venkatesh L Murthy Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Brendan L Eck; Raymond F Muzic; Jacob Levi; Hao Wu; Rachid Fahmi; Yuemeng Li; Anas Fares; Mani Vembar; Amar Dhanantwari; Hiram G Bezerra; David L Wilson Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2018-09-13 Impact factor: 3.609