| Literature DB >> 22863174 |
Stefan Brunner1, Andrei Todica, Guido Böning, Stefan G Nekolla, Moritz Wildgruber, Sebastian Lehner, Martina Sauter, Christopher Ubleis, Karin Klingel, Paul Cumming, Wolfgang Michael Franz, Marcus Hacker.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We performed an initial evaluation of non-invasive ECG-gated [18 F]FDG-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for serial measurements of left ventricular volumes and function in murine models of dilated (DCM) and ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), and then tested the effect of erythropoietin (EPO) treatment on DCM mice in a preliminary FDG-PET therapy monitoring study.Entities:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22863174 PMCID: PMC3441325 DOI: 10.1186/2191-219X-2-43
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EJNMMI Res Impact factor: 3.138
Figure 1Comparison between different imaging modalities, representative images. FDG-PET versus MRI (lower row) for animals with DCM (A, LVEF: MRI = 26%, FDG-PET = 37%), ICM (B, LV-EF: MRI = 12%, FDG-PET = 34%) and for healthy control animals (C, LVEF: MRI = 48%, FDG-PET = 68%).
Figure 2Scatter plots of the relationship between measurements of LV parameters. Correlations between LV-functional parameter measurements within the entire study group by FDG-PET and by MRI for all animals (left hand side). alongside the corresponding Bland-Altman-plot (right hand side) for all animals, for the cases of (A) EDV, (B) ESV and (C) LVEF.
Comparison between LV-functional parameters as calculated by cine MRI and FDG-PET for different study subgroups
| EDV (μL) | 125 ± 80 | 72 ± 37* | 63 ± 11 | 46 ± 4* | 195 ± 63 | 103 ± 35* | |
| Bias | 52 | 17 | 92 | ||||
| LoA | −44 to 149 | −3 to 37 | 5 to 180 | ||||
| ESV (μL) | 96 ± 77 | 42 ± 32* | 38 ± 14 | 20 ± 6* | 163 ± 63 | 67 ± 31* | |
| Bias | 54 | 18 | 96 | ||||
| LoA | −47 to 155 | 0 to 36 | 3 to 190 | ||||
| LVEF (%) | 31 ± 16 | 48 ± 15* | 42 ± 14 | 57 ± 13* | 18 ± 7 | 37 ± 10* | |
| Bias | −17 | −15 | −19 | ||||
| LoA | −30 to −4 | −26 to −5 | −34 to −5 | ||||
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation for the comparison of FDG-PET with the reference method cine MRI. Furthermore the corresponding biases and limits of agreement (LoA) calculated from Bland-Altman plots are presented. *Student's t test revealed a statistically significant difference.
Figure 3Correlation between infarct size and LVEF measured by MRI (A) and FDG-PET (B).
LV–function parameters measured at baseline and after 4 weeks with FDG-PET
| EDV | 47 ± 7 | 49 ± 9 | 0.371 | EDV | 40 ± 9 | 52 ± 15 | 0.031 |
| ESV | 22 ± 8 | 26 ± 10 | 0.012 | ESV | 20 ± 10 | 29 ± 16 | 0.078 |
| SV | 25 ± 2 | 23 ± 5 | 0.462 | SV | 20 ± 3 | 23 ± 1 | 0.064 |
| EF | 55 ± 11 | 48 ± 12 | 0.020 | EF | 51 ± 13 | 47 ± 11 | 0.345 |
Values are presented as mean and standard deviation, along with the corresponding p values (Student's t test).
Figure 4Monitoring EPO treatment with ECG-gated FDG-PET. (A) The mean magnitude of LVEF before (white bars) and after (black bars) treatment with saline vs. EPP, and (B) the change in LVEF (Δ EF) for the saline and EPO groups during 1 month of treatment.
Figure 5Correlation of LVEF as assessed by ECG-gated FDG-PET with degree of fibrosis. (A) Representative histological cardiac findings showing myocardial fibrotic areas in CVB3-infected mice (Masson trichrome staining). (B) Correlation of degree of fibrosis obtained histology with LVEF measured by FDG-PET.