Key result
82Rb-PET significantly underestimated myocardial area at risk compared to SPECT (28.1% vs 35.2%, P=0.04) and CMR in patients with STEMI, though final infarct size and myocardial salvage index were comparable.
Why the study?
Does 82Rb-PET accurately assess myocardial area at risk, final infarct size, and myocardial salvage index compared to SPECT and CMR in patients with STEMI?
Observational (n=12)
Blinded observers
No
Does 82Rb-PET accurately assess myocardial area at risk, final infarct size, and myocardial salvage index compared to SPECT and CMR in patients with STEMI?
Rest 82Rb-PET imaging is feasible for assessing final infarct size and myocardial salvage index in STEMI patients, though it underestimates the initial area at risk compared to SPECT and CMR.
82Rb-PET should not yet replace SPECT/CMR for area at risk in STEMI; leaves open its utility for salvage index.
BACKGROUND: Rb-PET myocardial perfusion imaging can estimate area at risk, final infarct size, and myocardial salvage index when compared to cardiac SPECT and magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS: Rb-PET, and CMR imaging were performed post-reperfusion and at a 3-month follow-up. An automated algorithm determined area at risk, final infarct size, and hence myocardial salvage index. RESULTS: SPECT, CMR, and PET were performed 2.2 ± 0.5, 34 ± 8.5, and 32 ± 24.4 h after reperfusion, respectively. Mean (± SD) area at risk were 35.2 ± 16.6%, 34.7 ± 11.3%, and 28.1 ± 16.1% of the left ventricle (LV) in SPECT, CMR, and PET, respectively, P = 0.04 for difference. Mean final infarct size estimates were 12.3 ± 15.4%, 13.7 ± 10.4%, and 11.9 ± 14.6% of the LV in SPECT, CMR, and PET imaging, respectively, P = .72. Myocardial salvage indices were 0.64 ± 0.33 (SPECT), 0.65 ± 0.20 (CMR), and 0.63 ± 0.28 (PET), (P = .78). CONCLUSIONS: Rb-PET underestimates area at risk in patients with STEMI when compared to SPECT and CMR. However, our findings suggest that PET imaging seems feasible when assessing the clinical important parameters of final infarct size and myocardial salvage index, although with great variability, in a selected STEMI population with large infarcts. These findings should be confirmed in a larger population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ghotbi et al. (2016) conducted an observational in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=12). 82Rb-PET myocardial perfusion imaging vs. SPECT and CMR was evaluated on Area at risk (AAR) as % of left ventricle (p=0.04). 82Rb-PET significantly underestimated myocardial area at risk compared to SPECT (28.1% vs 35.2%, P=0.04) and CMR in patients with STEMI, though final infarct size and myocardial salvage index were comparable.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: