Key result
First-pass analysis of 15O-water PET showed strong correlation with CMR for left-ventricular volumes (r > 0.84) and moderate correlation for ejection fraction (r = 0.52), demonstrating its feasibility for clinical practice.
Why the study?
Assessing LV volumes and EF is challenging with 15O-water PET due to freely diffusible tracer kinetics and poor blood-myocardium contrast on standard uptake images.
Does 15O-water PET first-pass analysis accurately measure LV volumes and EF compared to CMR in patients with known or suspected CAD?
Cross-Sectional (n=24)
Blinded observers
No
Does 15O-water PET first-pass analysis accurately measure LV volumes and EF compared to CMR in patients with known or suspected CAD?
Effect estimate: r > 0.84 for volumes, r = 0.52 for EF
First-pass analysis of 15O-water PET provides accurate and reproducible measurements of LV volumes and EF compared to CMR, allowing simultaneous assessment of myocardial blood flow and cardiac function.
Supports combined MBF and LV function assessment by 15O-water PET in CAD; leaves open prospective outcome validation before clinical adoption.
15 O-water PET is the gold standard for noninvasive quantification of myocardial blood flow. In addition to evaluation of ischemia, the assessment of cardiac function and remodeling is important in all cardiac diseases. However, since 15 O-water is freely diffusible and standard uptake images show little contrast between the myocardium and blood pool, the assessment of left-ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) is challenging. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the feasibility of calculating LV volumes and EF from first-pass analysis of 15 O-water PET, by comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) using a hybrid PET/MR scanner. Twenty-four patients with known or suspected CAD underwent a simultaneous ECG-gated cardiac PET/MR scan. The 15 O-water first-pass images (0-50 seconds) were analyzed using the CarPET software and the CMR images were analyzed using the software Segment, for LV volumes and EF calculations. The LV volumes and EF were compared using correlation and Bland–Altman analysis. In addition, inter- and intra-observer variability of LV volumes and EF were assessed for both modalities. The correlation between PET and CMR was strong for volumes ( r > 0.84) and moderate for EF ( r = 0.52), where the moderate correlation for EF was partly due to the small range of EF values. Agreement was high for all parameters, with a slight overestimation of PET values for end-diastolic volume but with no significant mean bias for other parameters. Inter- and intra-observer agreement of volumes was high and comparable between PET and CMR. For EF, inter-observer agreement was higher for PET and intra-observer agreement was higher for CMR. LV volumes and EF can be calculated by first-pass analysis of a 15 O-water PET scan with high accuracy and comparable precision as with CMR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nordström et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Coronary Artery Disease (n=24). 15O-water PET first-pass analysis vs. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) was evaluated on Correlation of left-ventricular volumes and ejection fraction between PET and CMR (r > 0.84 for volumes, r = 0.52 for EF). First-pass analysis of 15O-water PET showed strong correlation with CMR for left-ventricular volumes (r > 0.84) and moderate correlation for ejection fraction (r = 0.52), demonstrating its feasibility for clinical practice.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: