Key result
Dynamic Rubidium-82 PET provides MBF estimates comparable to microspheres in canine models.
Why the study?
Does Rubidium-82 PET accurately measure regional myocardial blood flow compared to microspheres in a canine model of stunned and infarcted myocardium?
Population
Canine models of stunned and infarcted myocardium
Comparison
Rubidium-82 positron emission tomography for… vs Radioactively labeled microspheres
Design
Preclinical
Follow-up
8 weeks
Authors
Loading...
May support Rb-82 PET for MBF in animal models; leaves open human validation in stunned and infarcted myocardium.
Does Rubidium-82 PET accurately measure regional myocardial blood flow compared to microspheres in a canine model of stunned and infarcted myocardium?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.73% vs 0.68%
p-value: p=<0.001
Dynamic 82Rb PET provides estimates of myocardial blood flow in stunned and infarcted tissue that correspond with clinical interpretation, despite small significant differences compared to microspheres.
Lekx et al. (2009) studied Stunned and infarcted myocardium (n=12). Rubidium-82 positron emission tomography vs. Radioactively labeled microspheres was evaluated on Regional myocardial blood flow (MBF) at rest and during dobutamine stress (p=<0.001). Dynamic Rubidium-82 PET provided estimates of myocardial blood flow comparable to microspheres in canine models, with average resting MBF of 0.73 vs 0.68 in nonischemic tissue (P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: