Key result
The 6-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 3 minutes produced a coronary flow reserve that averaged 15.7% higher than the 4-minute protocol with injection at 2 minutes.
Why the study?
Does a 6-minute adenosine infusion protocol improve maximum stress perfusion and coronary flow reserve compared to a 4-minute protocol in patients undergoing rubidium-82 PET?
Observational (n=127)
Does a 6-minute adenosine infusion protocol improve maximum stress perfusion and coronary flow reserve compared to a 4-minute protocol in patients undergoing rubidium-82 PET?
Effect estimate: 15.7% higher
A 6-minute adenosine infusion protocol produces significantly higher coronary flow reserve than a 4-minute protocol, potentially avoiding misclassification of physiological severity in coronary artery disease.
Requires caution comparing CFR across adenosine protocols; leaves open optimal timing for prognostic Rb-82 PET standardization.
BACKGROUND: Different adenosine stress imaging protocols have not been systemically validated for absolute myocardial perfusion and coronary flow reserve (CFR) by positron emission tomography, where submaximal stress precludes assessing physiological severity of coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 127 volunteers, serial rest-stress positron emission tomography scans using rubidium-82 with various adenosine infusion protocols identified (1) the protocol with maximum stress perfusion and CFR, (2) test-retest precision in same subject, (3) stress perfusion and CFR after adenosine compared with dipyridamole, (4) heterogeneity of coronary flow capacity combining stress perfusion and CFR, and (5) potential relevance for patients with risk factors or coronary artery disease. The adenosine 6-minute infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 3 minutes caused CFR that was significantly 15.7% higher than the 4-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 2 minutes and significantly more homogeneous by Kolmogorov-Smirnov analysis for histograms of 1344 pixel range of perfusion in paired positron emission tomographies. In a coronary artery disease cohort separate from volunteers of this study, compared with the 3/6-minute protocol, the 2/4-minute adenosine protocol would potentially have changed 332 of 1732 (19%) positron emission tomographies at low-risk physiological severity CFR ≥2.3 to CFR <2.0, thereby implying high-risk quantitative severity potentially appropriate for interventions but because of suboptimal stress of the 2/4 protocol in some patients. CONCLUSIONS: The 6-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 activation at 3 minutes produced CFR that averaged 15.7% higher than that in the 2/4-minute protocol, thereby potentially providing essential information for personalized management in some patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kitkungvan et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease risk assessment (n=127). 6-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 3 minutes vs. 4-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 2 minutes was evaluated on Coronary flow reserve (CFR) (15.7% higher). The 6-minute adenosine infusion with rubidium-82 injection at 3 minutes produced a coronary flow reserve that averaged 15.7% higher than the 4-minute protocol with injection at 2 minutes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: