Philip M Robson1, Marc R Dweck2, Maria Giovanna Trivieri3, Ronan Abgral4, Nicolas A Karakatsanis5, Johanna Contreras6, Umesh Gidwani6, Jagat P Narula6, Valentin Fuster6, Jason C Kovacic6, Zahi A Fayad3. 1. Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. Electronic address: philip.robson@mountsinai.org. 2. Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; British Heart Foundation Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. 3. Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 4. Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Brest, European University of Brittany, EA3878 GETBO, Brest, France. 5. Translational and Molecular Imaging Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 6. Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the authors' initial experience with combined coronary artery positron emission tomographic (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) and 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) radiotracers, describe common problems and their solutions, and demonstrate the feasibility of coronary PET/MR imaging in appropriate patients. BACKGROUND: Recently, PET imaging has been applied to the aortic valve and regions of atherosclerosis. 18F-FDG PET imaging has become established for imaging inflammation in atherosclerosis in the aorta and carotid arteries. Moreover, 18F-NaF has emerged as a novel tracer of active microcalcification in the aortic valve and coronary arteries. Coronary PET imaging remains challenging because of the small caliber of the vessels and their complex motion. Currently, most coronary imaging uses combined PET and computed tomographic imaging, but there is increasing enthusiasm for PET/MR imaging because of its reduced radiation, potential to correct for motion, and the complementary information available from cardiac MR in a single scan. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with diagnosed or documented risk factors for coronary artery disease underwent either 18F-FDG or 18F-NaF PET/MR imaging. Standard breath-held MR-based attenuation correction was compared with a novel free-breathing approach. The impact on PET image artifacts and the interpretation of vascular uptake were evaluated semiquantitatively by expert readers. Moreover, PET reconstructions with more algorithm iterations were compared visually and by target-to-background ratio. RESULTS: Image quality was significantly improved by novel free-breathing attenuation correction. Moreover, conspicuity of coronary uptake was improved by increasing the number of algorithm iterations from 3 to 6. Elevated radiotracer uptake could be localized to individual coronary lesions using both 18F-FDG (n = 1, maximal target-to-background ratio = 1.61) and 18F-NaF (n = 7, maximal target-to-background ratio = 1.55 ± 0.37), including in 1 culprit plaque post-myocardial infarction confirmed by myocardial late gadolinium enhancement. CONCLUSIONS: The authors provide the first demonstration of successful, low-radiation (7.2 mSv) PET/MR imaging of inflammation and microcalcification activity in the coronary arteries. However, this requires specialized approaches tailored to coronary imaging for both attenuation correction and PET reconstruction.
OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to describe the authors' initial experience with combined coronary artery positron emission tomographic (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) and 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) radiotracers, describe common problems and their solutions, and demonstrate the feasibility of coronary PET/MR imaging in appropriate patients. BACKGROUND: Recently, PET imaging has been applied to the aortic valve and regions of atherosclerosis. 18F-FDG PET imaging has become established for imaging inflammation in atherosclerosis in the aorta and carotid arteries. Moreover, 18F-NaF has emerged as a novel tracer of active microcalcification in the aortic valve and coronary arteries. Coronary PET imaging remains challenging because of the small caliber of the vessels and their complex motion. Currently, most coronary imaging uses combined PET and computed tomographic imaging, but there is increasing enthusiasm for PET/MR imaging because of its reduced radiation, potential to correct for motion, and the complementary information available from cardiac MR in a single scan. METHODS: Twenty-three patients with diagnosed or documented risk factors for coronary artery disease underwent either 18F-FDG or 18F-NaF PET/MR imaging. Standard breath-held MR-based attenuation correction was compared with a novel free-breathing approach. The impact on PET image artifacts and the interpretation of vascular uptake were evaluated semiquantitatively by expert readers. Moreover, PET reconstructions with more algorithm iterations were compared visually and by target-to-background ratio. RESULTS: Image quality was significantly improved by novel free-breathing attenuation correction. Moreover, conspicuity of coronary uptake was improved by increasing the number of algorithm iterations from 3 to 6. Elevated radiotracer uptake could be localized to individual coronary lesions using both 18F-FDG (n = 1, maximal target-to-background ratio = 1.61) and 18F-NaF (n = 7, maximal target-to-background ratio = 1.55 ± 0.37), including in 1 culprit plaque post-myocardial infarction confirmed by myocardial late gadolinium enhancement. CONCLUSIONS: The authors provide the first demonstration of successful, low-radiation (7.2 mSv) PET/MR imaging of inflammation and microcalcification activity in the coronary arteries. However, this requires specialized approaches tailored to coronary imaging for both attenuation correction and PET reconstruction.
Authors: Karen A Kurdziel; Joanna H Shih; Andrea B Apolo; Liza Lindenberg; Esther Mena; Yolanda Y McKinney; Stephen S Adler; Baris Turkbey; William Dahut; James L Gulley; Ravi A Madan; Ola Landgren; Peter L Choyke Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-06-22 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Mathieu Rubeaux; Nikhil V Joshi; Marc R Dweck; Alison Fletcher; Manish Motwani; Louise E Thomson; Guido Germano; Damini Dey; Debiao Li; Daniel S Berman; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Marc R Dweck; Elena Aikawa; David E Newby; Jason M Tarkin; James H F Rudd; Jagat Narula; Zahi A Fayad Journal: Circ Res Date: 2016-07-08 Impact factor: 17.367
Authors: J H F Rudd; E A Warburton; T D Fryer; H A Jones; J C Clark; N Antoun; P Johnström; A P Davenport; P J Kirkpatrick; B N Arch; J D Pickard; P L Weissberg Journal: Circulation Date: 2002-06-11 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Agnese Irkle; Alex T Vesey; David Y Lewis; Jeremy N Skepper; Joseph L E Bird; Marc R Dweck; Francis R Joshi; Ferdia A Gallagher; Elizabeth A Warburton; Martin R Bennett; Kevin M Brindle; David E Newby; James H Rudd; Anthony P Davenport Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2015-07-07 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Zahi A Fayad; Kathryn J Fowler; Dawn Holley; Andrei Iagaru; Alan B McMillan; Patrick Veit-Haiback; Robert J Witte; Greg Zaharchuk; Ciprian Catana Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Benjamin Ungar; Ana B Pavel; Philip M Robson; Audrey Kaufman; Alison Pruzan; Patrick Brunner; Shivani Kaushik; James G Krueger; Mark G Lebwohl; Venkatesh Mani; Zahi A Fayad; Emma Guttman-Yassky Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract Date: 2020-07-25
Authors: Vaishnavi Kundel; Maria Giovanna Trivieri; Nicolas A Karakatsanis; Phillip M Robson; Venkatesh Mani; Jorge R Kizer; Robert Kaplan; Zahi Fayad; Neomi Shah Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2018-03-05 Impact factor: 2.816