BACKGROUND: To evaluate the influence of SPECT attenuation correction on the quantification of hibernating myocardium derived from perfusion SPECT and (18)F-FDG PET. METHODS AND RESULTS: 20 patients underwent rest (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin perfusion SPECT/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Perfusion images were reconstructed without attenuation correction (NC), with attenuation correction based on the CT from the SPECT/CT (AC_SPECT), and with attenuation correction based on the CT from the PET/CT (AC_PET). Another 56 patients had rest (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin perfusion SPECT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Perfusion images were reconstructed as NC and AC_PET. The amounts of hibernating myocardium and scar were quantified with QPS and corresponding AC and NC normative databases. In both cohorts, perfusion in the inferior wall was higher in the AC scans than without AC. Global and regional values for total perfusion deficit (TPD), hibernation and scar areas did not differ between NC, AC_SPECT, and AC_PET scans. In a retrospective evaluation with 7% cut-off of hibernating myocardium as a condition for revascularization, the therapeutic approach would have been altered in 5 of 56 patients, if the AC_PET approach had been used. CONCLUSIONS: AC of SPECT perfusion scans with an attenuation map derived from PET/CT scans is feasible. If AC is unavailable, perfusion scans should be compared to NC normative databases for assessing TPD, hibernation, and mismatch. It should be taken into account that in approximately 10% of the patients, a therapeutic recommendation based on published thresholds for hibernating myocardium would be altered if NC scans were used as compared to AC scans.
BACKGROUND: To evaluate the influence of SPECT attenuation correction on the quantification of hibernating myocardium derived from perfusion SPECT and (18)F-FDG PET. METHODS AND RESULTS: 20 patients underwent rest (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin perfusion SPECT/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Perfusion images were reconstructed without attenuation correction (NC), with attenuation correction based on the CT from the SPECT/CT (AC_SPECT), and with attenuation correction based on the CT from the PET/CT (AC_PET). Another 56 patients had rest (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin perfusion SPECT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT. Perfusion images were reconstructed as NC and AC_PET. The amounts of hibernating myocardium and scar were quantified with QPS and corresponding AC and NC normative databases. In both cohorts, perfusion in the inferior wall was higher in the AC scans than without AC. Global and regional values for total perfusion deficit (TPD), hibernation and scar areas did not differ between NC, AC_SPECT, and AC_PET scans. In a retrospective evaluation with 7% cut-off of hibernating myocardium as a condition for revascularization, the therapeutic approach would have been altered in 5 of 56 patients, if the AC_PET approach had been used. CONCLUSIONS: AC of SPECT perfusion scans with an attenuation map derived from PET/CT scans is feasible. If AC is unavailable, perfusion scans should be compared to NC normative databases for assessing TPD, hibernation, and mismatch. It should be taken into account that in approximately 10% of the patients, a therapeutic recommendation based on published thresholds for hibernating myocardium would be altered if NC scans were used as compared to AC scans.
Authors: Rene Nkoulou; Aju P Pazhenkottil; Ronny R Buechel; Lars Husmann; Ines Valenta; Bernhard A Herzog; Mathias Wolfrum; Jelena R Ghadri; Philipp A Kaufmann Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2010-10-08 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Hidetaka Nishina; Daniel S Berman; Cigdem Akincioglu; Aiden Abidov; John D Friedman; Sean W Hayes; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: C M C van Campen; Frans C Visser; Arno P van der Weerdt; Paul Knaapen; Emile F I Comans; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Carel C de Cock; Cees A Visser Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2006-09-26 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gianni D'Egidio; Graham Nichol; Kathryn A Williams; Ann Guo; Linda Garrard; Robert deKemp; Terrence D Ruddy; Jean DaSilva; Dennis Humen; Karen Y Gulenchyn; Michael Freeman; Normand Racine; Francois Benard; Paul Hendry; Rob S B Beanlands Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2009-09
Authors: Rob S B Beanlands; Terrence D Ruddy; Robert A deKemp; Robert M Iwanochko; Geoffrey Coates; Michael Freeman; Claude Nahmias; Paul Hendry; Robert J Burns; Andre Lamy; Lynda Mickleborough; William Kostuk; Ernest Fallen; Graham Nichol Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-11-20 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Serge D Van Kriekinge; Hidetaka Nishina; Muneo Ohba; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2008-10-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Andrei Todica; Mathias J Zacherl; Hao Wang; Guido Böning; Nathalie L Jansen; Carmen Wängler; Peter Bartenstein; Michael C Kreissl; Marcus Hacker; Stefan Brunner; Sebastian Lehner Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2014-09-05 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Lisa Gross; Lisa Paintmayer; Sebastian Lehner; Lydia Brandl; Christoph Brenner; Ulrich Grabmaier; Bruno Huber; Peter Bartenstein; Hans-Diogenes Theiss; Wolfgang-Michael Franz; Steffen Massberg; Andrei Todica; Stefan Brunner Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-09-28 Impact factor: 6.875
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
Authors: Sebastian Lehner; Isabel Nowak; Mathias Zacherl; Julia Brosch-Lenz; Maximilian Fischer; Harun Ilhan; Johannes Rübenthaler; Astrid Gosewisch; Peter Bartenstein; Andrei Todica Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2021-08-02 Impact factor: 3.872