| Literature DB >> 33135093 |
Roberto Sciagrà1, Mark Lubberink2,3, Fabien Hyafil4,5, Antti Saraste6,7, Riemer H J A Slart8,9, Denis Agostini10, Carmela Nappi11, Panagiotis Georgoulias12, Jan Bucerius13, Christoph Rischpler14, Hein J Verberne15.
Abstract
The use of cardiac PET, and in particular of quantitative myocardial perfusion PET, has been growing during the last years, because scanners are becoming widely available and because several studies have convincingly demonstrated the advantages of this imaging approach. Therefore, there is a need of determining the procedural modalities for performing high-quality studies and obtaining from this demanding technique the most in terms of both measurement reliability and clinical data. Although the field is rapidly evolving, with progresses in hardware and software, and the near perspective of new tracers, the EANM Cardiovascular Committee found it reasonable and useful to expose in an updated text the state of the art of quantitative myocardial perfusion PET, in order to establish an effective use of this modality and to help implementing it on a wider basis. Together with the many steps necessary for the correct execution of quantitative measurements, the importance of a multiparametric approach and of a comprehensive and clinically useful report have been stressed.Entities:
Keywords: Myocardial blood flow; Myocardial flow reserve; PET; Quantitative imaging
Year: 2020 PMID: 33135093 PMCID: PMC7603916 DOI: 10.1007/s00259-020-05046-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ISSN: 1619-7070 Impact factor: 9.236
Fig. 1Typical noise-equivalent count (NEC) rate curves. BGO = bismuth germanate, GSO = gadolinium oxyorthosilicate, LSO = lutetium oxyorthosilicate, LYSO = lutetium-yttrium oxyorthosilicate, PMT = photomultiplier, SIPM = silicon photomultiplier. a NEC rates. b NEC rates accounting for image quality improvements due to time of flight. Typical count rate ranges during the first pass of a dynamic acquisition over the heart, as well as during a routine whole-body [18F]FDG scan, are indicated. b The advantage of modern LYSO+SiPM scanners during first-pass imaging compared with BGO systems is clearly shown
Properties of commonly used crystals for PET scanners
| BGO | GSO | LSO | LYSO | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Density (g/cm3) | 7.1 | 6.7 | 7.4 | 7.4 |
| Attenuation length (mm) | 10.4 | 14.1 | 11.4 | 11.8 |
| Light output (photons/MeV) | 9000 | 8000 | 30,000 | 30,000 |
| Light decay time (ns) | 300 | 60 | 40 | 40 |
BGO = bismuth germanate, GSO = gadolinium oxyorthosilicate, LSO = lutetium oxyorthosilicate, LYSO = lutetium-yttrium oxyorthosilicate
Fig. 2Transport rate constant from plasma to tissue (K1) as function of MBF for [15O]water, [13N]NH3 [2] and 82Rb [29] compared with the SPECT tracer [99mTc]Tc-sestamibi [30]. For [13N]NH3, curves based on uptake rate (K1) and on retention, that is, the transport rate into the metabolically trapped compartment, are given
Fig. 3Protocols for rest–stress quantitative cardiac PET. The upper panel shows the sequence for tracers with short half-life ([15O]water, 82Rb). The lower panel shows the standard sequence for longer half-life tracers ([13N]NH3, [18F]flurpiridaz); however, using correction for residual activity, the shorter protocol can be adopted also for [13N]NH3
Fig. 4Effect of 15 mm PET/CT misalignment on absolute MBF for values measured from washout rate ([15O]water; left) and values measured from uptake rate (82Rb or [13N]NH3; right). Polar maps are based on the same simulated MBF scans for both cases. Misalignment results in a very slight increase in measured MBF for [15O]water and in a large anterior defect for 82Rb or [13N]NH3
Fig. 5Transmission–emission misalignment example. Misalignment between CT transmission and rest 82Rb perfusion PET images (a) with correction of transmission–emission misalignment (b). Anterolateral perfusion defect on rest 82Rb perfusion images (c, upper rows) deriving from applying the incorrect attenuation coefficients during tomographic reconstruction to an area of LV myocardium overlying lung field on CT transmission scan, and normal rest perfusion study (c, lower rows) after correction, with relative polar maps (d)
Examples of framing schemes for re-binning of dynamic list mode acquisitions
| Reference | Tracer | Frame sequence | Total time |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kajander S et al. [ | [15O]water | 14 × 5 s; 3 × 10 s; 3 × 20 s; 4 × 30 s | 4 min 40 s |
| Danad I et al. [ | [15O]water | 1 × 10 s; 8 × 5 s; 4 × 10 s; 2 × 15 s; 3 × 20s; 2 × 30 s; 2 × 60 s | 6 min |
| Clinical protocol in Aarhus, Amsterdam, Uppsala | [15O]water | 1 × 10 s; 8 × 5 s; 4 × 10 s; 2 × 15 s; 3 × 20s; 2 × 30 s | 4 min |
| Muzik O et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 12 × 10 s; 4 × 15 s; 4 × 30 s; 3 × 300 s | 20 min |
| Hutchins GD et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 12 × 10 s; 4 × 30 s; 1 × 360 s | 10 min |
| DeGrado TR et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 12 × 10 s; 4 × 30 s; 3 × 120 s; 2 × 300 s | 20 min |
| Sciagrà R et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 24 × 5 s; 2 × 30 s; 1 × 60; 1 × 300 s | 9 min |
| El Fahkri et al. [ | 82Rb | 24 × 5 s; 86 × 30 s | 6 min |
| Lortie et al. [ | 82Rb | 12 × 10 s; 2 × 30 s; 1 × 60 s; 1 × 120 s, 1 × 240 s | 10 min |
| Dekemp RA et al. [ | 82Rb | 9 × 10 s; 3 × 30 s; 1 × 60 s; 1 × 120 s | 6 min |
| Dekemp RA et al. [ | 82Rb | 12 × 10 s; 2 × 30 s; 1 × 60 s; 1 × 120 s | 6 min |
| Dekemp RA et al. [ | 82Rb | 12 × 5 s; 6 × 10 s; 4 × 20 s; 4 × 40 s | 6 min |
| Armstrong IS et al. [ | 82Rb | 1 × 10 s; 8 × 5 s; 3 × 10 s; 2 × 20 s; 4 × 60 s | 6 min |
| Gaudieri V et al. [ | 82Rb | 12 × 5 s; 6 × 10 s; 4 × 20 s; 4 × 40 s | 6 min |
Fig. 6[15O]water parametric MBF images from a 65-year-old female with angina referred for assessment of ischaemia with PET. The images shown here are parametric MBF images based on 4-min dynamic [15O]water PET scans, with their corresponding polar maps. Note that colour scales of all images represent MBF in mL/g/min as seen in the colour bars. SPECT was negative. PET clearly shows balanced ischaemia with stress MBF far below the threshold of 2.3 mL/g/min
Fig. 7Compartment models: a single-tissue compartment model; b irreversible two-tissue compartment model. CA is the radioactivity concentration in arterial blood, CT the radioactivity concentration in tissue, with C1 and C2 describing free and internalised tracer in tissue, and K1, k2 and k3 are rate constants describing the transport rates of tracer between the different compartments
Proposed stress MBF and MFR threshold values for CAD detection
| Reference | Tracer | Stress MBF cut-off | MFR cut-off |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kajander S et al. [ | [15O]water | 2.5 mL/min/g | |
| Danad I et al. [ | [15O]water | 1.86 mL/min/g | 2.3 |
| Danad I et al. [ | [15O]water | 2.2 mL/min/g | 2.5 |
| Danad I et al. [ | [15O]water | 2.3 mL/min/g | 2.5 |
| Hajjiri MM et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 1.85 mL/min/g | 2 |
| Fiechter M et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 2 | |
| Morton G et al. [ | [13N]NH3 | 1.44 | |
| Anagnostopoulos C et al. [ | 82Rb | 1.7 mL/min/g | 2 |
| Naya M et al. [ | 82Rb | 2 | |
| Naya M et al. [ | 82Rb | 1.93 | |
| Ziadi MC et al. [ | 82Rb | 2 |
Scheme for quantitative PET reporting
| Administrative data | |
| • Hospital name, including department, address, contacts | |
| • Study identification number | |
| Patient-specific information | |
| • Patient identification, including personal data, sex, date of birth, height, weight, patient code and archive number | |
| • Relevant history, including risk factor profile, previous cardiac events, prior revascularisation procedures, symptoms and current medications | |
| • Indication for the study and specific clinical question to be answered by the investigation | |
| Study-related data | |
| • Type of study | |
| • Study date | |
| • Interpretation date | |
| • Radiopharmaceutical, injected activity at rest and at stress, type of stress agent | |
| • Acquisition protocol including description of dynamic parameters and framing of the gatedstudy | |
| • Rest blood pressure and heart rate | |
| • ECG at baseline | |
| • Peak stress blood pressure and heart rate | |
| • Presence of symptoms and ECG changes during the stress test | |
| • Quality assessment of the acquired images | |
| • Description of the processing software and compartmental model applied to the quantitative analysis | |
| Image reporting | |
| • Image description with visual analysis of resting and stress images, whenever available,with reference on the 17-segment model for territory identification | |
| • Scoring of the 17-segment model, with calculation of SRS, SSS and SDS (not for [15O]water) | |
| • Definition of the perfusion normality vs. abnormality according to the accepted criteria taking care to assign the perfusion defects to the related coronary territory, according to the standard distribution or to the patient coronary distribution pattern if known | |
| • Normal SSS = 0–3 (< 5% myocardium); mildly abnormal SSS = 4–7 (5–10% myocardium) moderately or severely abnormal SSS > 8 (> 10% myocardium) (not for [15O]water) | |
| • Visual estimate of LV dimensions and transient ischaemic dilation | |
| • Abnormal visualisation of the right ventricle and its possible enlargement | |
| • Extracardiac findings, such as abnormal lung uptake (not for [15O]water) | |
| Quantitative analysis | |
| • Resting MBF (corrected for the rate pressure product if the resting heart rate and/or the baseline blood pressure is abnormally elevated) with range of the segmental values and both the single territory values and the global left ventricular value | |
| • Stress MBF, described as above | |
| • MFR described as above | |
| • Summary of findings in term of segments/territories with peak MBF/MFR below the normal threshold (identified according to the tracer and the model used for data analysis) | |
| Gated PET acquisition | |
| • Resting LV volumes, EF and wall motion abnormalities, to be described qualitatively and scored with a proper point-scale in terms of motion and thickening according to the standard 17-segment scheme | |
| • Stress LV volumes, EF and wall motion abnormalities, to be described qualitatively and scored with a proper point-scale in terms of motion and thickening according to the standard 17-segment scheme | |
| • LVEF reserve | |
| CT (images of adequate quality) | |
| • Evaluation of coronary artery calcium scoring (description) and Agatston score; description of abnormal extracardiac findings on the CT | |
| Hybrid PET/CCTA | |
| • Correlation between MBF and the main findings of the CCTA (e.g. location of significant coronary obstructive disease and downstream MBF) | |
| Conclusion | |
| • Clinical interpretation of visual findings, MBF and MFR and gated PET data (whenever applicable) | |
| • Specific answer to the clinical question, and if needed recommendation for additional imaging |
Fig. 8[13N]NH3 PET of a patient with three-vessel disease. The uptake images (left panel) show a stress-induced inferior wall perfusion defect (arrows), which is confirmed by quantitative PET analysis (right panel), demonstrating clearly reduced stress MBF and decreased coronary flow reserve (CFR = MFR) in the right coronary artery territory (RCA). However, mildly abnormal stress MBF and MFR are observed in the left anterior descending (LAD) and left circumflex (LCX) territories as well. In gated PET analysis, LVEF decreased from 54% at rest to 48% after stress, confirming the presence of diffuse ischaemia
Fig. 9Hybrid PET/CT image demonstrating 3D reconstruction of coronary anatomy and MBF. CCTA shows a stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery (insert), and [15O]water PET shows reduced MBF (green colour) in the myocardium subtended by the artery during adenosine stress
Comparison of the available tracers for quantitative perfusion PET
| [15O]water | [13N]NH3 | 82Rb | [18F]flurpiridaz | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radionuclide half-life | 122 s | 9.96 min | 75 s | 109.8 min |
| Availability | On-site cyclotron | On-site cyclotron | Generator | Cyclotron (possible shipping) |
| Mean positron range in water (mm) [ | 2.5 | 1.5 | 5.9 | 0.6 |
| Relationship with MBF | Ideal (freely diffusible) | High extraction fraction | Non-linear extraction fraction | High extraction fraction |
| Image quality | Parametric MBF images only | Good to high | Fair to good | Very high |
| Gated imaging | Possible from first pass (blood pool) | High quality | Good quality | High quality |
| Time schedule | Very tight | Interval between rest and stress injections | Very tight | Separate stress and rest injections |
| Previous experience | Used mainly in research setting and with hybrid imaging | Widely used qualitatively and quantitatively | Widely used qualitatively and quantitatively | Presently ongoing phase III trial |
MBF = myocardial blood flow