EANM procedural guidelines for PET/CT quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging

Roberto Sciagrà, Mark Lubberink, Fabien Hyafil, Antti Saraste, Riemer H J A Slart, Denis Agostini, Carmela Nappi, Panagiotis Georgoulias, Jan Bucerius, Christoph Rischpler, Hein J Verberne, Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), Roberto Sciagrà, Mark Lubberink, Fabien Hyafil, Antti Saraste, Riemer H J A Slart, Denis Agostini, Carmela Nappi, Panagiotis Georgoulias, Jan Bucerius, Christoph Rischpler, Hein J Verberne, Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM)

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.

Keywords: Myocardial blood flow; Myocardial flow reserve; PET; Quantitative imaging.

Conflict of interest statement

Mark Lubberink is co-founder and part-time employee of MedTrace Pharma A/S. Fabien Hyafil is consultant for Naogen. Antti Saraste is supported by grants from the Finnish Cardiovascular Foundation and Academy of Finland, has received consulting fees from Astra Zeneca and Amgen, and has received speaker fees from Astra Zeneca, Abbott, Amgen, Bayer and Novartis. All the other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Typical 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
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Transport 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. 3
Fig. 3
Protocols 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. 4
Fig. 4
Effect 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. 5
Fig. 5
Transmission–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)
Fig. 6
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. 7
Fig. 7
Compartment 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
Fig. 8
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. 9
Fig. 9
Hybrid 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

References

    1. Brunken RC, Schelbert HR. Positron emission tomography in clinical cardiology. Cardiol Clin. 1989;7:607–629.
    1. Schelbert HR, Phelps ME, Huang SC, MacDonald NS, Hansen H, Selin C, et al. N-13 ammonia as an indicator of myocardial blood flow. Circulation. 1981;63:1259–1272.
    1. Bergmann SR, Fox KA, Rand AL, McElvany KD, Welch MJ, Markham J, et al. Quantification of regional myocardial blood flow in vivo with H215O. Circulation. 1984;70:724–33.
    1. Krivokapich J, Smith GT, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, Ratib O, Phelps ME, et al. 13N ammonia myocardial imaging at rest and with exercise in normal volunteers: quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion with dynamic positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1989;80:1328–1337.
    1. Huang SC, Williams BA, Krivokapich J, Araujo L, Phelps ME, Schelbert HR. Rabbit myocardial 82Rb kinetics and a compartmental model for blood flow estimation. Am J Phys. 1989;256(4 Pt 2):H1156–64.
    1. Renaud JM, Yip K, Guimond J, Trottier M, Pibarot P, Turcotte E, et al. Characterization of 3-dimensional PET systems for accurate quantification of myocardial blood flow. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:103–109.
    1. Lewellan T. Time-of-flight PET. Semin Nucl Med. 1998;28:268–275.
    1. Yamamoto M, Ficke DC, Ter-Pogossian MM. Experimental assessment of the gain achieved by the utilization of time-of-flight information in a positron emission tomograph (super PETT I) IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1982;1:187–192.
    1. NEMA Standards publication NU 2–2012: performance measurements of positron emission tomographs. Washington: National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2012.
    1. Conti M. Effects of randoms on signal-to-noise ratio in TOF PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2006;53:1188–1193.
    1. Armstrong IS, Tonge CM, Arumugam P. Assessing time-of-flight signal-to-noise ratio gains within the myocardium and subsequent reductions in administered activity in cardiac PET studies. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:405–412.
    1. Suda M, Onoguchi M, Tomiyama T, Ishihara K, Takahashi N, Sakurai M, et al. The reproducibility of time-of-flight PET and conventional PET for the quantification of myocardial blood flow and coronary flow reserve with N-13 ammonia. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:457–472.
    1. Hsu DFC, Ilan E, Peterson WT, Uribe J, Lubberink M, Levin CS. Studies of a next-generation silicon-photomultiplier-based time-of-flight PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1511–1518.
    1. Rausch I, Ruiz A, Valverde-Pascual I, Cal-González J, Beyer T, Carrio I. Performance evaluation of the Vereos PET/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:561–567.
    1. van Sluis J, de Jong J, Schaar J, Noordzij W, van Snick P, Dierckx R, et al. Performance characteristics of the digital biograph vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:1031–1036.
    1. Driessen RS, van Timmeren JE, Stuijfzand WJ, Rijnierse MT, Danad I, Raijmakers PG, et al. Measurement of LV volumes and function using oxygen-15 water-gated PET and comparison with CMR imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;9:1472–1474.
    1. Nordström J, Kero T, Harms HJ, Widström C, Flachskampf FA, Sörensen J, et al. Calculation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from dynamic cardiac-gated 15O-water PET/CT: 5D-PET. EJNMMI Phys. 2017;4:26.
    1. Schindler TH, Dilsizian V. PET-determined hyperemic myocardial blood flow: further progress to clinical application. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1476–1478.
    1. Iguchi S, Moriguchi T, Yamazaki M, Hori Y, Koshino K, Toyoda K, et al. System evaluation of automated production and inhalation of 15O-labeled gaseous radiopharmaceuticals for the rapid 15O-oxygen PET examinations. EJNMMI Phys. 2018;5:37.
    1. Partridge M, Spinelli A, Ryder W, Hindorf C. The effect of β+ energy on performance of a small animal PET camera. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect A. 2006;568:933–936.
    1. Sánchez-Crespo A, Andreo P, Larsson SA. Positron flight in human tissues and its influence on PET image spatial resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:44–51.
    1. Iida H, Rhodes CG, De Silva R, Yamamoto Y, Araujo LI, Maseri A, Jones T. Myocardial tissue fraction – correction for partial volume effects and measure of tissue viability. J Nucl Med. 1991;32:2169–2175.
    1. Yamamoto Y, De Silva R, Rhodes CG, Araujo LI, Iida H, Rechavia E, et al. A new strategy for the assessment of viable myocardium and regional myocardial blood flow using 15O-water and dynamic positron emission tomography. Circulation. 1992;86:167–178.
    1. Einstein AJ. Radiation risk from coronary artery disease imaging: how do different diagnostic tests compare? Heart. 2008;94:1519–1521.
    1. Lubberink M, Harms HJ, Halbmeijer R, de Haan S, Knaapen P, Lammertsma AA. Low-dose quantitative myocardial blood flow imaging using 15O-water and PET without attenuation correction. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:575–80.
    1. Mattsson S, Johansson L, Leide Svegborn S, Liniecki J, Noßke D, Riklund KÅ, et al. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals: a compendium of current information related to frequently used substances. Ann ICRP. 2015;44(2 Suppl):7–321.
    1. Selwyn AP, Allan RM, L’Abbate A, Horlock P, Camici P, Clark J, et al. Relation between regional myocardial uptake of rubidium-82 and perfusion: absolute reduction of cation uptake in ischemia. Am J Cardiol. 1982;50:112–121.
    1. Goldstein RA, Mullani NA, Marani SK, Fisher DJ, Gould KL, O’Brien HA., Jr Myocardial perfusion with rubidium-82. II. Effects of metabolic and pharmacologic interventions. J Nucl Med. 1983;24:907–915.
    1. Prior JO, Allenbach G, Valenta I, Kosinski M, Burger C, Verdun FR, et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb positron emission tomography: clinical validation with 15O-water. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:1037–47.
    1. Hsu B, Hu LH, Yang BH, Chen LC, Chen YK, Ting CH, et al. SPECT myocardial blood flow quantitation toward clinical use: a comparative study with 13N-Ammonia PET myocardial blood flow quantitation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:117–128.
    1. Gould KL, Goldstein RA, Mullani NA, Kirkeeide RL, Wong WH, Tewson TJ, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stenoses by myocardial perfusion imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilation. VIII. Clinical feasibility of positron cardiac imaging without a cyclotron using generator-produced rubidium-82. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1986;7:775–789.
    1. Go RT, Marwick TH, MacIntyre WJ, Saha GB, Neumann DR, Underwood DA, et al. A prospective comparison of rubidium-82 PET and thallium-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging utilizing a single dipyridamole stress in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:1899–1905.
    1. Case JA, deKemp RA, Slomka PJ, Smith MF, Heller GV, Cerqueira MD. Status of cardiovascular PET radiation exposure and strategies for reduction: an information statement from the Cardiovascular PET Task Force. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:1427–1439.
    1. Walsh WF, Fill HR, Harper PV. Nitrogen-13-labeled ammonia for myocardial imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 1977;7:59–66.
    1. Maddahi J, Packard RRS. Cardiac PET perfusion tracers: current status and future directions. Semin Nucl Med. 2014;44:333–343.
    1. Hsu B. PET tracers and techniques for measuring myocardial blood flow in patients with coronary artery disease. J Biomed Res. 2013;27:452–459.
    1. Husmann L, Wiegand M, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Siegrist PT, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography: a comparison with coronary angiography. Int J Card Imaging. 2008;24:511–518.
    1. Muzik O, Beanlands RS, Hutchins GD, Manger TJ, Nguyen N, Schwaiger M. Validation of nitrogen-13-ammonia tracer kinetic model for quantification of myocardial blood flow using PET. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:83–91.
    1. DeGrado TR, Hanson MW, Turkington TG, Delong DM, Brezinski DA, Vallée JP, et al. Estimation of myocardial blood flow for longitudinal studies with 13N-labeled ammonia and positron emission tomography. J Nucl Cardiol. 1996;3:494–507.
    1. Hutchins GD, Schwaiger M, Rosenspire KC, Krivokapich J, Schelbert H, Kuhl DE. Noninvasive quantification of regional blood flow in the human heart using N-13 ammonia and dynamic positron emission tomographic imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1990;15:1032–1042.
    1. Verberne HJ, Acampa W, Anagnostopoulos C, Ballinger J, Bengel F, De Bondt P, et al. EANM procedural guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and SPECT/CT: 2015 revision. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1929–1940.
    1. Tadamura E, Iida H, Matsumoto K, Mamede M, Kubo S, Toyoda H, et al. Comparison of myocardial blood flow during dobutamine-atropine infusion with that after dipyridamole administration in normal men. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:130–136.
    1. Skopicki HA, Abraham SA, Picard MH, Alpert NM, Fischman AJ, Gewirtz H. Effects of dobutamine at maximally tolerated dose on myocardial blood flow in humans with ischemic heart disease. Circulation. 1997;96:3346–3352.
    1. Iskandrian AE, Bateman TM, Belardinelli L, Blackburn B, Cerqueira MD, Hendel RC, et al. Adenosine versus regadenoson comparative evaluation in myocardial perfusion imaging: results of the ADVANCE phase 3 multicenter international trial. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:645–658.
    1. Vleeming EJ, Lazarenko SV, van der Zant FM, Pan XB, Declerck JM, Wondergem M, et al. Cardiac displacement during 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion PET/CT: comparison between adenosine- and regadenoson-induced stress. J Nucl Med Technol. 2018;46:114–122.
    1. Memmott MJ, Tonge CM, Saint KJ, Arumugam P. Impact of pharmacological stress agent on patient motion during rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion PET/CT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018;25:1286–1295.
    1. Goudarzi B, Fukushima K, Bravo P, Merrill J, Bengel FM. Comparison of the myocardial blood flow response to regadenoson and dipyridamole: a quantitative analysis in patients referred for clinical 82Rb myocardial perfusion PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1908–16.
    1. Markousis-Mavrogenis G, Juárez-Orozco LE, Alexanderson E. Residual activity correction in quantitative myocardial perfusion 13N-ammonia PET imaging: a study in post-MI patients. Hell J Cardiol. 2017;58:245–249.
    1. Opstal TSJ, Knol RJJ, Cornel JH, Wondergem M, van der Zant FM. Myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow reserve values in 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion PET/CT using a time-efficient protocol in patients without coronary artery disease. Eur J Hybrid Imaging. 2018;2:11. doi: 10.1186/s41824-018-0029-z.
    1. Moody JB, Lee BC, Corbett JR, Ficaro EP, Murthy VL. Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: a technical perspective. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:935–951.
    1. Søndergaard HM, Madsen MM, Boisen K, Bøttcher M, Schmitz O, Nielsen TT, et al. Evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) versus filtered back-projection for the assessment of myocardial glucose uptake and myocardial perfusion using dynamic PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:320–329.
    1. Armstrong IS, Tonge CM, Arumugam P. Impact of point spread function modeling and time-of-flight on myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow reserve measurements for rubidium-82 cardiac PET. J Nucl Cardiol. 2014;21:467–474.
    1. Souvatzoglou M, Bengel F, Busch R, Kruschke C, Fernolendt H, Lee D, et al. Attenuation correction in cardiac PET/CT with three different CT protocols: a comparison with conventional PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1991–2000.
    1. McQuaid SJ, Hutton BF. Sources of attenuation-correction artefacts in cardiac PET/CT and SPECT/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1117–1123.
    1. De Man B, Nuyts J, Dupont P, Marchal G, Suetens P. Reduction of metal streak artefacts in X-ray computed tomography using a transmission maximum a posteriori algorithm. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2000;47:977–981.
    1. Slomka PJ, Rubeaux M, Le Meunier L, Dey D, Lazewatsky JL, Pan T, et al. Dual-gated motion-frozen cardiac PET with flurpiridaz F 18. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1876–1881.
    1. Hunter CRRN, Klein R, Beanlands RS, deKemp RA. Patient motion effects on the quantification of regional myocardial blood flow with dynamic PET imaging. Med Phys. 2016;43:1829.
    1. Armstrong IS, Memmott MJ, Saint KJ, Saillant A, Hayden C, Arumugam P. Assessment of motion correction in dynamic rubidium-82 cardiac PET with and without frame-by-frame adjustment of attenuation maps for calculation of myocardial blood flow. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019. 10.1007/s12350-019-01834-5.
    1. Kajander S, Joutsiniemi E, Saraste M, Pietilä M, Ukkonen H, Saraste A, et al. Cardiac positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging accurately detects anatomically and functionally significant coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2010;122:603–613.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, Harms HJ, de Haan S, van den Oever ML, et al. Hybrid imaging using quantitative H215O PET and CT-based coronary angiography for the detection of coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:55–63.
    1. Sciagrà R, Calabretta R, Cipollini F, Passeri A, Castello A, Cecchi F, et al. Myocardial blood flow and left ventricular functional reserve in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a 13NH3 gated PET study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:866–875.
    1. El Fakhri G, Sitek A, Guerin B, Kijewski MF, Di Carli MF, Moore SC. Quantitative dynamic cardiac 82Rb PET using generalized factor and compartment analyses. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1264–1271.
    1. Lortie M, Beanlands RSB, Yoshinaga K, Klein R, DaSilva JN, deKemp RA. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb dynamic PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1765–1774.
    1. Dekemp RA, Declerck J, Klein R, Pan XB, Nakazato R, Tonge C, et al. Multisoftware reproducibility study of stress and rest myocardial blood flow assessed with 3D dynamic PET/CT and a 1-tissue-compartment model of 82Rb kinetics. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:571–577.
    1. Gaudieri V, Acampa W, Rozza F, Nappi C, Zampella E, Assante R, et al. Coronary vascular function in patients with resistant hypertension and normal myocardial perfusion: a propensity score analysis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;20:949–958. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jez025.
    1. Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. American Heart Association Writing Group on Myocardial Segmentation and Registration for Cardiac Imaging Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. Circulation. 2002;105:539–542.
    1. Brophey MD, Farukhi IM, Castanon R, DeLaPena R, Bradshaw L, Banerjee S. Accuracy of 82Rb PET/CT myocardial perfusion imaging with regadenoson stress, including 3-year clinical outcomes. J Nucl Med Technol. 2017;45:75–81.
    1. Hsiao E, Ali B, Blankstein R, Skali H, Ali T, Bruyere J Jr, et al. Detection of obstructive coronary artery disease using regadenoson stress and 82Rb PET/CT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1748–54.
    1. Dorbala S, Hachamovitch R, Curillova Z, Thomas D, Vangala D, Kwong RY, et al. Incremental prognostic value of gated Rb-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging over clinical variables and rest LVEF. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:846–854.
    1. Bravo PE, Chien D, Javadi M, Merrill J, Bengel FM. Reference ranges for LVEF and LV volumes from electrocardiographically gated 82Rb cardiac PET/CT using commercially available software. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:898–905.
    1. Slart RH, Bax JJ, de Jong RM, de Boer J, Lamb HJ, Mook PH, et al. Comparison of gated PET with MRI for evaluation of left ventricular function in patients with coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:176–182.
    1. Dorbala S, Vangala D, Sampson U, Limaye A, Kwong R, Di Carli MF. Value of vasodilator left ventricular ejection fraction reserve in evaluating the magnitude of myocardium at risk and the extent of angiographic coronary artery disease: an 82Rb PET/CT study. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:349–358.
    1. Bravo PE, Tahari A, Pozios I, Luo HC, Bengel FM, Wahl RL, et al. Apparent left ventricular cavity dilatation during PET/CT in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: clinical predictors and potential mechanisms. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:1304–1314.
    1. Yalçin H, Valenta I, Yalçin F, Corona-Villalobos C, Vasquez N, Ra J, et al. Effect of diffuse subendocardial hypoperfusion on left ventricular cavity size by 13N-ammonia perfusion PET in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 2016;118:1908–1915.
    1. Danad I, Uusitalo V, Kero T, Saraste A, Raijmakers PG, Lammertsma AA, et al. Quantitative assessment of myocardial perfusion in the detection of significant coronary artery disease: cutoff values and diagnostic accuracy of quantitative [(15)O]H2O PET imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1464–75.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Driessen RS, Leipsic J, Raju R, Naoum C, et al. Comparison of coronary CT angiography, SPECT, PET, and hybrid imaging for diagnosis of ischemic heart disease determined by fractional flow reserve. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2:1100–1107.
    1. Berti V, Sciagrà R, Neglia D, Pietilä M, Scholte AJ, Nekolla S, et al. Segmental quantitative myocardial perfusion with PET for the detection of significant coronary artery disease in patients with stable angina. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1522–1529.
    1. Harms HJ, Knaapen P, de Haan S, Halbmeijer R, Lammertsma AA, Lubberink M. Automatic generation of absolute myocardial blood flow images using [15O]H2O and a clinical PET/CT scanner. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:930–9.
    1. Harms HJ, De Haan S, Knaapen P, Allaart CP, Lammertsma AA, Lubberink M. Parametric images of myocardial viability using a single 15O-H2O PET/CT scan. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:745–749.
    1. Harms HJ, Nesterov SV, Han C, Danad I, Leonora R, Raijmakers PG, et al. Comparison of clinical non-commercial tools for automated quantification of myocardial blood flow using oxygen-15-labelled water PET/CT. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:431–441.
    1. Yoshida K, Mullani N, Gould KL. Coronary flow and flow reserve by PET simplified for clinical applications using rubidium-82 or nitrogen-13-ammonia. J Nucl Med. 1996;37:1701–1712.
    1. Johnson NP, Gould KL. Integrating noninvasive absolute flow, coronary flow reserve, and ischemic thresholds into a comprehensive map of physiological severity. J Am Col Cardiol Imaging. 2012;5:430–440.
    1. Herrero P, Markham J, Shelton ME, Weinheimer CJ, Bergmann SR. Noninvasive quantification of regional myocardial perfusion with rubidium-82 and positron emission tomography: exploration of a mathematical model. Circulation. 1990;82:1377–1386.
    1. Nesterov SV, Deshayes E, Sciagrà R, Settimo L, Declerck JM, Pan XB, et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow in absolute terms using 82Rb PET imaging: the RUBY-10 study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:1119–27.
    1. Tahari AK, Lee A, Rajaram M, Fukushima K, Lodge MA, Lee BC, et al. Absolute myocardial flow quantification with 82Rb PET/CT: comparison of different software packages and methods. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:126–35.
    1. Dunet V, Klein R, Allenbach G, Renaud J, deKemp RA, Prior JO. Myocardial blood flow quantification by Rb-82 cardiac PET/CT: A detailed reproducibility study between two semi-automatic analysis programs. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:499–510.
    1. Sunderland JJ, Pan XB, Declerck J, Menda Y. Dependency of cardiac rubidium-82 imaging quantitative measures on age, gender, vascular territory, and software in a cardiovascular normal population. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:72–84.
    1. Murthy VL, Lee BC, Sitek A, Naya M, Moody J, Polavarapu V, et al. Comparison and prognostic validation of multiple methods of quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb PET. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:1952–1958.
    1. Kuhle WG, Porenta G, Huang SC, Buxton D, Gambhir SS, Hansen H, et al. Quantification of regional myocardial blood flow using 13N-ammonia and reoriented dynamic positron emission tomographic imaging. Circulation. 1992;86:1004–17.
    1. Hutchins GD, Caraher JM, Raylman RR. A region of interest strategy for minimizing resolution distortions quantitative myocardial PET studies. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:1243–1250.
    1. Khorsand A, Graf S, Pirich C, Muzik O, Kletter K, Dudczak R, et al. Assessment of myocardial perfusion by dynamic N-13 ammonia PET imaging: comparison of 2 tracer kinetic models. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12:410–417.
    1. Slomka PJ, Alexanderson E, Jácome R, Jiménez M, Romero E, Meave A, et al. Comparison of clinical tools for measurements of regional stress and rest myocardial blood flow assessed with 13N-ammonia PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:171–181.
    1. Monroy-Gonzalez AG, Juarez-Orozco LE, Han C, Vedder IR, García DV, Borra R, et al. Software reproducibility of myocardial blood flow and flow reserve quantification in ischemic heart disease: a 13N-ammonia PET study. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019. 10.1007/s12350-019-01620-3.
    1. Nekolla SG, Reder S, Saraste A, Higuchi T, Dzewas G, Preissel A, et al. Evaluation of the novel myocardial perfusion PET tracer 18F-BMS747158-02: comparison to 13N ammonia and validation with microspheres in a pig model. Circulation. 2009;119:2333–2342.
    1. Rajaram M, Tahari AK, Lee AH, Lodge MA, Tsui B, Nekolla S, et al. Cardiac PET/CT misregistration causes significant changes in estimated myocardial blood flow. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:50–54.
    1. Piccinelli M, Votaw JR, Garcia EV. Motion correction and its impact on absolute myocardial blood flow measures with PET. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2018;20:34.
    1. Koenders SS, van Dijk JD, Jager PL, Ottervanger JP, Slump CH, van Dalen JA. Impact of regadenoson-induced myocardial creep on dynamic rubidium-82 PET myocardial blood flow quantification. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:719–728.
    1. Votaw JR, Packard RRS. Technical aspects of acquiring and measuring myocardial blood flow: method, technique, and QA. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018;25:665–670.
    1. Campisi R, Czernin J, Karpman HL, Schelbert HR. Coronary vasodilatory capacity and flow reserve in normal myocardium supplied by bypass grafts late after surgery. Am J Cardiol. 1997;80:27–31.
    1. Spyrou N, Khan MA, Rosen SD, Foale R, Davies DW, Sogliani F, et al. Persistent but reversible coronary microvascular dysfunction after bypass grafting. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2000;279:H2634–H2640.
    1. Paz Y, Morgenstern R, Weinberg R, Chiles M, Bhatti N, Ali Z, et al. Relation of coronary flow reserve to other findings on positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging and left heart catheterization in patients with end-stage renal disease being evaluated for kidney transplant. Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:1909–1912.
    1. Bol A, Melin JA, Vanoverschelde JL, Baudhuin T, Vogelaers D, De Pauw M, et al. Direct comparison of [13N]ammonia and [15O]water estimates of perfusion with quantification of regional myocardial blood flow by microspheres. Circulation. 1993;87:512–525.
    1. Kolthammer JA, Muzic RF. Optimized dynamic framing for PET-based myocardial blood flow estimation. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:5783.
    1. Tout D, Tonge C, Muthu S, Arumugam P. Assessment of a protocol for routine simultaneous myocardial blood flow measurement and standard myocardial perfusion imaging with rubidium-82 on a high-count rate positron emission tomography system. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33:1202–1211.
    1. Klein R, Adler A, Beanlands RS, deKemp RA. Precision-controlled elution of a 82Sr/82Rb generator for cardiac perfusion imaging with positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:659–673.
    1. Esteves FP, Nye JA, Khan A, Folks RD, Halkar RK, Garcia EV, et al. Prompt-gamma compensation in Rb-82 myocardial perfusion 3D PET/CT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:247–253.
    1. Armstrong IS, Memmott MJ, Tonge CM, Arumugam P. The impact of prompt gamma compensation on myocardial blood flow measurements with rubidium-82 dynamic PET. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018;25:596–605.
    1. Maddahi J. Properties of an ideal PET perfusion tracer: new PET tracer cases and data. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19(Suppl 1):S30–S37.
    1. Brown TL, Voicu C, Merrill J, Bengel FM. Pathophysiologic correlates of 82Rb biodistribution in cardiac PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:479–484.
    1. Alzahrani AH, Arasaratnam P, Massalha S, Alenazy A, Lee A, Clarkin O, et al. Effect of proton pump inhibitors on rubidium-82 gastric uptake using positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019. 10.1007/s12350-019-01954-y.
    1. Rasmussen T, Kjær A, Hasbak P. Stomach interference in 82Rb-PET myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:1934–42.
    1. De Jong RM, Blanksma PK, Willemsen AT, Anthonio RL, Meeder JG, Pruim J, et al. Posterolateral defect of the normal human heart investigated with nitrogen-13-ammonia and dynamic PET. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:581–585.
    1. Klingensmith WC 3rd, Noonan C, Goldberg JH, Buchwald D, Kimball JT, Manson SM. Decreased perfusion in the lateral wall of the left ventricle in PET/CT studies with 13N-ammonia: evaluation in healthy adults. J Nucl Med Technol. 2009;37:215–9.
    1. Steffen DA, Giannopoulos AA, Grossmann M, Messerli M, Schwyzer M, Gräni C, et al. “Apical thinning”: relations between myocardial wall thickness and apical left ventricular tracer uptake as assessed with positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018. 10.1007/s12350-018-1397-2.
    1. Tomiyama T, Ishihara K, Suda M, Kanaya K, Sakurai M, Takahashi N, et al. Impact of time-of-flight on qualitative and quantitative analyses of myocardial perfusion PET studies using 13N-ammonia. J Nucl Cardiol. 2015;22:998–1007.
    1. Kagaya A, Fukuda H, Yoshida K, Endo M, Himi T, Niwayama H, et al. Pulmonary kinetics of 13N-ammonia in smoking subjects - a quantitative study using dynamic PET. Kaku Igaku. 1992;29:1099–1106.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Harms HJ, Heymans MW, van Royen N, Lubberink M, et al. Impact of anatomical and functional severity of coronary atherosclerotic plaques on the transmural perfusion gradient: a [15O]H2O PET study. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2094–105.
    1. Hajjiri MM, Leavitt MB, Zheng H, Spooner AE, Fischman AJ, Gewirtz H. Comparison of positron emission tomography measurement of adenosine-stimulated absolute myocardial blood flow versus relative myocardial tracer content for physiological assessment of coronary artery stenosis severity and location. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009;2:751–758.
    1. Fiechter M, Ghadri JR, Gebhard C, Fuchs TA, Pazhenkottil AP, Nkoulou RN, et al. Diagnostic value of 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion PET: added value of myocardial flow reserve. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1230–4.
    1. Morton G, Chiribiri A, Ishida M, Hussain ST, Schuster A, Indermuehle A, et al. Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion in patients with coronary artery disease: comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1546–1555.
    1. Anagnostopoulos C, Almonacid A, El Fakhri G, Curillova Z, Sitek A, Roughton M, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary vasodilator reserve assessed by 82Rb PET imaging and coronary artery stenosis severity. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1593–601.
    1. Naya M, Murthy VL, Foster CR, Gaber M, Klein J, Hainer J, et al. Prognostic interplay of coronary artery calcification and underlying vascular dysfunction in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2098–2106.
    1. Naya M, Murthy VL, Taqueti VR, Foster CR, Klein J, Garber M, et al. Preserved coronary flow reserve effectively excludes high-risk coronary artery disease on angiography. J Nucl Med. 2014;55:248–255.
    1. Ziadi MC, Dekemp RA, Williams KA, Guo A, Chow BJ, Renaud JM, et al. Impaired myocardial flow reserve on rubidium-82 positron emission tomography imaging predicts adverse outcomes in patients assessed for myocardial ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:740–748.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, Harms HJ, de Haan S, van den Oever ML, et al. Coronary risk factors and myocardial blood flow in patients evaluated for coronary artery disease: a quantitative [15O]H2O PET/CT study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012;39:102–12.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Appelman YE, Harms HJ, de Haan S, Marques KM, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary artery calcium score and hyperemic myocardial blood flow as assessed by hybrid 15O-water PET/CT imaging in patients evaluated for coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:256–64.
    1. Joutsiniemi E, Saraste A, Pietilä M, Mäki M, Kajander S, Ukkonen H, et al. Absolute flow or myocardial flow reserve for the detection of significant coronary artery disease? Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:659–665.
    1. Bom MJ, van Diemen PA, Driessen RS, Everaars H, Schumacher SP, Wijmenga JT, et al. Prognostic value of [15O]H2O positron emission tomography-derived global and regional myocardial perfusion. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019. 10.1093/ehjci/jez258.
    1. Klocke FJ, Baird MG, Lorell BH, Bateman TM, Messer JV, Berman DS, et al. ACC/AHA/ASNC guidelines for the clinical use of cardiac radionuclide imaging--executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/ASNC Committee to revise the 1995 Guidelines for the Clinical Use of Cardiac Radionuclide Imaging) J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42:1318–1333.
    1. Di Carli MF, Dorbala S, Meserve J, El Fakhri G, Sitek A, Moore SC. Clinical myocardial perfusion PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:783–793.
    1. Mc Ardle BA, Dowsley TF, deKemp RA, Wells GA, Beanlands RS. Does rubidium-82 PET have superior accuracy to SPECT perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of obstructive coronary disease?: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1828–1837.
    1. Bateman TM, Heller GV, McGhie AI, Friedman JD, Case JA, Bryngelson JR, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of rest/stress ECG-gated Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET: comparison with ECG-gated Tc-99m sestamibi SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13:24–33.
    1. Stewart RE, Schwaiger M, Molina E, Popma J, Gacioch GM, Kalus M, et al. Comparison of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography and thallium-201 SPECT imaging for detection of coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1991;67:1303–1310.
    1. Yoshinaga K, Chow BJ, Williams K, Chen L, deKemp RA, Garrard L, Lok-Tin Szeto A, et al. What is the prognostic value of myocardial perfusion imaging using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:1029–1039.
    1. Hyafil F, Chequer R, Sorbets E, Estellat C, Ducrocq G, Rouzet F, et al. Head-to-head comparison of the diagnostic performances of rubidium-PET and SPECT with CZT camera for the detection of myocardial ischemia in a population of women and overweight individuals. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018. 10.1007/s12350-018-01557-z.
    1. Parkash R, deKemp RA, Ruddy TD, Kitsikis A, Hart R, Beauchesne L, et al. Potential utility of rubidium 82 PET quantification in patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11:440–449.
    1. deKemp RA, Yoshinaga K, Beanlands RS. Will 3-dimensional PET-CT enable the routine quantification of myocardial blood flow? J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:380–397.
    1. Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, Gaber M, Di Carli G, et al. Improved cardiac risk assessment with noninvasive measures of coronary flow reserve. Circulation. 2011;124:2215–2224.
    1. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Beanlands RS, Merhige ME, Williams BA, Veledar E, et al. Prognostic value of stress myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography: results from a multicenter observational registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:176–184.
    1. Nohara R, Kambara H, Kawai C, Yonekura Y, Senda M, Saji H, et al. Exercise 13NH3-positron emission computed tomography (PET) versus exercise single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) J Cardiogr Suppl. 1987;12:107–116.
    1. Muzik O, Duvernoy C, Beanlands RS, Sawada S, Dayanikli F, Wolfe ER, Jr, et al. Assessment of diagnostic performance of quantitative flow measurements in normal subjects and patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease by means of nitrogen-13 ammonia and positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31:534–540.
    1. Czernin J, Barnard RJ, Sun KT, Krivokapich J, Nitzsche E, Dorsey D, et al. Effect of short-term cardiovascular conditioning and low-fat diet on myocardial blood flow and flow reserve. Circulation. 1995;92:197–204.
    1. Baller D, Notohamiprodjo G, Gleichmann U, Holzinger J, Weise R, Lehmann J. Improvement in coronary flow reserve determined by positron emission tomography after 6 months of cholesterol-lowering therapy in patients with early stages of coronary atherosclerosis. Circulation. 1999;99:2871–2875.
    1. Quinones MJ, Hernandez-Pampaloni M, Schelbert H, Bulnes-Enriquez I, Jimenez X, Hernandez G, et al. Coronary vasomotor abnormalities in insulin-resistant individuals. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140:700–708.
    1. Schindler TH, Cadenas J, Facta AD, Li Y, Olschewski M, Sayre J, et al. Improvement in coronary endothelial function is independently associated with a slowed progression of coronary artery calcification in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:364–373.
    1. Schindler TH, Campisi R, Dorsey D, Prior JO, Olschewski M, Sayre J, et al. Effect of hormone replacement therapy on vasomotor function of the coronary microcirculation in post-menopausal women with medically treated cardiovascular risk factors. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:978–986.
    1. Quercioli A, Pataky Z, Vincenti G, Makoundou V, Di Marzo V, Montecucco F, et al. Elevated endocannabinoid plasma levels are associated with coronary circulatory dysfunction in obesity. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1369–1378.
    1. Quercioli A, Montecucco F, Pataky Z, Thomas A, Ambrosio G, Staub C, et al. Improvement in coronary circulatory function in morbidly obese individuals after gastric bypass-induced weight loss: relation to alterations in endocannabinoids and adipocytokines. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:2063–2073.
    1. Dorbala S, Hassan A, Heinonen T, Schelbert HR, Di Carli MF. Coronary vasodilator reserve and Framingham risk scores in subjects at risk for coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006;13:761–776.
    1. Herzog BA, Husmann L, Valenta I, Gaemperli O, Siegrist PT, Tay FM, et al. Long-term prognostic value of 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion positron emission tomography added value of coronary flow reserve. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:150–156.
    1. Tio RA, Dabeshlim A, Siebelink HM, de Sutter J, Hillege HL, Zeebregts CJ, et al. Comparison between the prognostic value of left ventricular function and myocardial perfusion reserve in patients with ischemic heart disease. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:214–219.
    1. Slart RH, Zeebregts CJ, Hillege HL, de Sutter J, Dierckx RA, van Veldhuisen DJ, et al. Myocardial perfusion reserve after a PET-driven revascularization procedure: a strong prognostic factor. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:873–879.
    1. Sciagrà R, Passeri A, Bucerius J, Verberne HJ, Slart RH, Lindner O, et al. Clinical use of quantitative cardiac perfusion PET: rationale, modalities and possible indications. Position paper of the Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:1530–1545.
    1. Dilsizian V, Bacharach SL, Beanlands RS, Bergmann SR, Delbeke D, Dorbala S, et al. ASNC imaging guidelines/SNMMI procedure standard for positron emission tomography (PET) nuclear cardiology procedures. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:1187–1226.
    1. Murthy VL, Bateman TM, Beanlands RS, Berman DS, Borges-Neto S, Chareonthaitawee P, et al. Clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow using PET: joint position paper of the SNMMI Cardiovascular Council and the ASNC. J Nucl Cardiol. 2018;25:269–297.
    1. Ziadi MC, Dekemp RA, Williams K, Guo A, Renaud JM, Chow BJ, et al. Does quantification of myocardial flow reserve using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography facilitate detection of multivessel coronary artery disease? J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:670–680.
    1. Murthy VL, Naya M, Taqueti VR, Foster CR, Gaber M, Hainer J, et al. Effects of sex on coronary microvascular dysfunction and cardiac outcomes. Circulation. 2014;129:2518–2527.
    1. Taqueti VR, Shaw LJ, Cook NR, Murthy VL, Shah NR, Foster CR, et al. Excess cardiovascular risk in women relative to men referred for coronary angiography is associated with severely impaired coronary flow reserve, not obstructive disease. Circulation. 2017;135:566–577.
    1. Harnett DT, Hazra S, Maze R, Mc Ardle BA, Alenazy A, Simard T, et al. Clinical performance of Rb-82 myocardial perfusion PET and Tc-99m-based SPECT in patients with extreme obesity. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:275–283.
    1. Fukushima K, Javadi MS, Higuchi T, Lautamäki R, Merrill J, Nekolla SG, et al. Prediction of short-term cardiovascular events using quantification of global myocardial flow reserve in patients referred for clinical 82Rb PET perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:726–32.
    1. Farhad H, Dunet V, Bachelard K, Allenbach G, Kaufmann PA, Prior JO. Added prognostic value of myocardial blood flow quantitation in rubidium-82 positron emission tomography imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;14:1203–1210.
    1. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF. Cardiac PET perfusion: prognosis, risk stratification, and clinical management. Semin Nucl Med. 2014;44:344–357.
    1. Neglia D, Michelassi C, Trivieri MG, Sambuceti G, Giorgetti A, Pratali L, et al. Prognostic role of myocardial blood flow impairment in idiopathic left ventricular dysfunction. Circulation. 2002;105:186–193.
    1. Majmudar MD, Murthy VL, Shah RV, Kolli S, Mousavi N, Foster CR, et al. Quantification of coronary flow reserve in patients with ischaemic and non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy and its association with clinical outcomes. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:900–909.
    1. Cecchi F, Olivotto I, Gistri R, Lorenzoni R, Chiriatti G, Camici PG. Coronary microvascular dysfunction and prognosis in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1027–1035.
    1. Castagnoli H, Ferrantini C, Coppini R, Passeri A, Baldini K, Berti V, et al. Role of quantitative myocardial positron emission tomography for risk stratification in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a 2016 reappraisal. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43:2413–2422.
    1. Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Gaber M, Hainer J, Klein J, et al. Association between coronary vascular dysfunction and cardiac mortality in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Circulation. 2012;126:1858–1868.
    1. Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, Gaber M, Dorbala S, et al. Coronary vascular dysfunction and prognosis in patients with chronic kidney disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012;5:1025–1034.
    1. Shah NR, Charytan DM, Murthy VL, Skali Lami H, Veeranna V, Cheezum MK, et al. Prognostic value of coronary flow reserve in patients with dialysis-dependent ESRD. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016;27:1823–1829.
    1. Monroy-Gonzalez AG, Tio RA, de Groot JC, et al. Long-term prognostic value of quantitative myocardial perfusion in patients with chest pain and normal coronary arteries. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:1844–1852.
    1. Mc Ardle BA, Davies RA, Chen L, Small GR, Ruddy TD, Dwivedi G, et al. Prognostic value of rubidium-82 positron emission tomography in patients after heart transplant. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:930–937.
    1. Gould KL, Johnson NP, Kaul S, Kirkeeide RL, Mintz GS, Rentrop KP, et al. Patient selection for elective revascularization to reduce myocardial infarction and mortality: new lessons from randomized trials, coronary physiology, and statistics. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;8. 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.114.003099.
    1. Taqueti VR, Hachamovitch R, Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, Hainer J, et al. Global coronary flow reserve is associated with adverse cardiovascular events independently of luminal angiographic severity and modifies the effect of early revascularization. Circulation. 2015;131:19–27.
    1. Siegrist PT, Husmann L, Knabenhans M, Gaemperli O, Valenta I, Hoefflinghaus T, et al. 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion imaging with a PET/CT scanner: impact on clinical decision making and cost-effectiveness. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:889–95.
    1. Flotats A, Knuuti J, Gutberlet M, Marcassa C, Bengel FM, Kaufmann PA, et al. Hybrid cardiac imaging: SPECT/CT and PET/CT. A joint position statement by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), the European Society of Cardiac Radiology (ESCR) and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology (ECNC) Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:201–121.
    1. Dorbala S, Di Carli MF, Delbeke D, Abbara S, DePuey EG, Dilsizian V, et al. SNMMI/ASNC/SCCT guideline for cardiac SPECT/CT and PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1485–1507.
    1. Nensa F, Bamberg F, Rischpler C, Menezes L, Poeppel TD, la Fougère C, European Society of Cardiovascular Radiology (ESCR); European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) Cardiovascular Committee Hybrid cardiac imaging using PET/MRI: a joint position statement by the European Society of Cardiovascular Radiology (ESCR) and the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) Eur Radiol. 2018;28:4086–4101.
    1. Knuuti J, Ballo H, Juarez-Orozco LE, Saraste A, Kolh P, Rutjes AWS, et al. The performance of non-invasive tests to rule-in and rule-out significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable angina: a meta-analysis focused on post-test disease probability. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:3322–3330.
    1. Menke J, Kowalski J. Diagnostic accuracy and utility of coronary CT angiography with consideration of unevaluable results: a systematic review and multivariate Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis with intention to diagnose. Eur Radiol. 2016;26:451–458.
    1. Hoffmann U, Ferencik M, Udelson JE, Picard MH, Truong QA, Patel MR, PROMISE Investigators Prognostic value of noninvasive cardiovascular testing in patients with stable chest pain: insights from the PROMISE trial (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) Circulation. 2017;135:2320–2332.
    1. Cheruvu C, Precious B, Naoum C, Blanke P, Ahmadi A, Soon J, et al. Long term prognostic utility of coronary CT angiography in patients with no modifiable coronary artery disease risk factors: results from the 5 year follow-up of the CONFIRM International Multicenter Registry. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2016;10:22–27.
    1. Nielsen LH, Bøtker HE, Sørensen HT, Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sand NP, et al. Prognostic assessment of stable coronary artery disease as determined by coronary computed tomography angiography: a Danish multicentre cohort study. Eur Heart J. 2016:ehw548.
    1. Budoff MJ, Mayrhofer T, Ferencik M, Bittner D, Lee KL, Lu MT, PROMISE Investigators Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium in the PROMISE study (Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain) Circulation. 2017;136:1993–2005.
    1. Thomassen A, Petersen H, Johansen A, Braad PE, Diederichsen AC, Mickley H, et al. Quantitative myocardial perfusion by O-15-water PET: individualized vs. standardized vascular territories. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:970–976.
    1. Montalescot G, Sechtem U, Achenbach S, Andreotti F, Arden C, Budaj A, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the Management of Stable Coronary Artery Disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2013;34:2949–3003.
    1. Hecht HS, Cronin P, Blaha MJ, Budoff MJ, Kazerooni EA, Narula J, et al. 2016 SCCT/STR guidelines for coronary artery calcium scoring of noncontrast noncardiac chest CT scans: a report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Society of Thoracic Radiology. J Thorac Imaging. 2017;32:W54–W66.
    1. Reyes E, Stirrup J, Roughton M, D’Souza S, Underwood SR, Anagnostopoulos C. Attenuation of adenosine-induced myocardial perfusion heterogeneity by atenolol and other cardioselective beta-adrenoceptor blockers: a crossover myocardial perfusion imaging study. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1036–1043.
    1. Kassamali RH, Kim DH, Patel H, Raichura N, Hoey ET, Hodson J, et al. Safety of an i.v. β-adrenergic blockade protocol for heart rate optimization before coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;203:759–762.
    1. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Kalff V, Namdar M, Valenta I, Stefani L, et al. Validation of a new cardiac image fusion software for three-dimensional integration of myocardial perfusion SPECT and stand-alone 64-slice CT angiography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1097–1106.
    1. Manka R, Kuhn FP, Kuest SM, Gaemperli O, Kozerke S, Kaufmann PA. Hybrid cardiac magnetic resonance/computed tomographic imaging: first fusion of three-dimensional magnetic resonance perfusion and low-dose coronary computed tomographic angiography. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2625.
    1. Gould KL, Pan T, Loghin C, Johnson NP, Guha A, Sdringola S. Frequent diagnostic errors in cardiac PET/CT due to misregistration of CT attenuation and emission PET images: a definitive analysis of causes, consequences, and corrections. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1112–1121.
    1. Gimelli A, Achenbach S, Buechel RR, Edvardsen T, Francone M, Gaemperli O, EACVI Scientific Documents Committee Strategies for radiation dose reduction in nuclear cardiology and cardiac computed tomography imaging: a report from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), the Cardiovascular Committee of European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM), and the European Society of Cardiovascular Radiology (ESCR) Eur Heart J. 2018;39:286–296.
    1. Namdar M, Hany TF, Koepfli P, Siegrist PT, Burger C, Wyss CA, et al. Integrated PET/CT for the assessment of coronary artery disease: a feasibility study. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:930–935.
    1. Sampson UK, Dorbala S, Limaye A, Kwong R, Di Carli MF. Diagnostic accuracy of rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion imaging with hybrid positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the detection of coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1052–1058.
    1. Groves AM, Speechly-Dick ME, Kayani I, Pugliese F, Endozo R, McEwan J, et al. First experience of combined cardiac PET/64-detector CT angiography with invasive angiographic validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:2027–2033.
    1. Thomassen A, Petersen H, Diederichsen AC, Mickley H, Jensen LO, Johansen A, et al. Hybrid CT angiography and quantitative 15O-water PET for assessment of coronary artery disease: comparison with quantitative coronary angiography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:1894–904.
    1. Rizvi A, Han D, Danad I, Hartaigh BÓ, Lee JH, Gransar H, et al. Diagnostic performance of hybrid cardiac imaging methods for assessment of obstructive coronary artery disease compared with stand-alone coronary computed tomography angiography: a meta-analysis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11:589–599.
    1. Santana CA, Garcia EV, Faber TL, Sirineni GK, Esteves FP, Sanyal R, et al. Diagnostic performance of fusion of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and computed tomography coronary angiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2009;16:201–211.
    1. Slomka PJ, Cheng VY, Dey D, Woo J, Ramesh A, Van Kriekinge S, et al. Quantitative analysis of myocardial perfusion SPECT anatomically guided by coregistered 64-slice coronary CT angiography. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1621–1630.
    1. Gaemperli O, Schepis T, Valenta I, Husmann L, Scheffel H, Duerst V, et al. Cardiac image fusion from stand-alone SPECT and CT: clinical experience. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:696–703.
    1. Liga R, Vontobel J, Rovai D, Marinelli M, Caselli C, Pietila M, EVINCI Study Investigators Multicentre multi-device hybrid imaging study of coronary artery disease: results from the EValuation of INtegrated Cardiac Imaging for the Detection and Characterization of Ischaemic Heart Disease (EVINCI) hybrid imaging population. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2016;17:951–960.
    1. Gräni C, Benz DC, Possner M, Clerc OF, Mikulicic F, Vontobel J, et al. Fused cardiac hybrid imaging with coronary computed tomography angiography and positron emission tomography in patients with complex coronary artery anomalies. Congenit Heart Dis. 2017;12:49–57.
    1. Maaniitty T, Jaakkola S, Saraste A, Knuuti J. Hybrid coronary computed tomography angiography and positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging in evaluation of recurrent symptoms after coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018. 10.1093/ehjci/jey160.
    1. Stenström I, Maaniitty T, Uusitalo V, Pietilä M, Ukkonen H, Kajander S, et al. Frequency and angiographic characteristics of coronary microvascular dysfunction in stable angina: a hybrid imaging study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;18:1206–1213.
    1. Pazhenkottil AP, Nkoulou RN, Ghadri JR, Herzog BA, Buechel RR, Kuest SM, et al. Prognostic value of cardiac hybrid imaging integrating single-photon emission computed tomography with coronary computed tomography angiography. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:1465–1471.
    1. Maaniitty T, Stenström I, Bax JJ, Uusitalo V, Ukkonen H, Kajander S, et al. Prognostic value of coronary CT angiography with selective PET perfusion imaging in coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;10:1361–1370.
    1. Pazhenkottil AP, Nkoulou RN, Ghadri JR, Herzog BA, Kuest SM, Husmann L, et al. Impact of cardiac hybrid single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography imaging on choice of treatment strategy in coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2824–2829.
    1. Danad I, Raijmakers PG, Harms HJ, van Kuijk C, van Royen N, Diamant M, et al. Effect of cardiac hybrid 15O-water PET/CT imaging on downstream referral for invasive coronary angiography and revascularization rate. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:170–179.
    1. Schepis T, Gaemperli O, Koepfli P, Namdar M, Valenta I, Scheffel H, et al. Added value of coronary artery calcium score as an adjunct to gated SPECT for the evaluation of coronary artery disease in an intermediate-risk population. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1424–1430.
    1. Ghadri JR, Pazhenkottil AP, Nkoulou RN, Goetti R, Buechel RR, Husmann L, et al. Very high coronary calcium score unmasks obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with normal SPECT MPI. Heart. 2011;97:998–1003.
    1. Schenker MP, Dorbala S, Hong EC, Rybicki FJ, Hachamovitch R, Kwong RY, et al. Interrelation of coronary calcification, myocardial ischemia, and outcomes in patients with intermediate likelihood of coronary artery disease: a combined positron emission tomography/computed tomography study. Circulation. 2008;117:1693–1700.
    1. Assante R, Acampa W, Zampella E, Arumugam P, Nappi C, Gaudieri V, et al. Coronary atherosclerotic burden vs. coronary vascular function in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with normal myocardial perfusion: a propensity score analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017;44:1129–1135.
    1. Assante R, Zampella E, Arumugam P, Acampa W, Imbriaco M, Tout D, et al. Quantitative relationship between coronary artery calcium and myocardial blood flow by hybrid rubidium-82 PET/CT imaging in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:494–501.
    1. Imbriaco M, Nappi C, Ponsiglione A, Pisani A, Dell'Aversana S, Nicolai E, et al. Hybrid positron emission tomography-magnetic resonance imaging for assessing different stages of cardiac impairment in patients with Anderson-Fabry disease: AFFINITY study group. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019. 10.1093/ehjci/jez039.
    1. Nappi C, Altiero M, Imbriaco M, Nicolai E, Giudice CA, Aiello M, et al. First experience of simultaneous PET/MRI for the early detection of cardiac involvement in patients with Anderson-Fabry disease. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;42:1025–1031.
    1. Nensa F, Poeppel TD, Beiderwellen K, Schelhorn J, Mahabadi AA, Erbel R, et al. Hybrid PET/MR imaging of the heart: feasibility and initial results. Radiology. 2013;268:366–373.
    1. Rischpler C, Langwieser N, Souvatzoglou M, Batrice A, van Marwick S, Snajberk J, et al. PET/MRI early after myocardial infarction: evaluation of viability with late gadolinium enhancement transmurality vs. 18F-FDG uptake. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;16:661–669.
    1. Wicks E, Menezes L, Pantazis A, Mohiddin S, Porter J, Booth H, et al. Novel hybrid positron emission tomography - magnetic resonance (PET-MR) multi-modality inflammatory imaging has improved diagnostic accuracy for detecting cardiac sarcoidosis. Heart. 2014;100:A80.
    1. Writing group; Document reading group; EACVI Reviewers: This document was reviewed by members of the EACVI Scientific Documents Committee for 2014–2016 and 2016–2018 A joint procedural position statement on imaging in cardiac sarcoidosis: from the Cardiovascular and Inflammation & Infection Committees of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine, the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;18:1073–1089.
    1. Yalamanchili P, Wexler E, Hayes M, Yu M, Bozek J, Kagan M, et al. Mechanism of uptake and retention of 18F BMS747158-02 in cardiomyocytes: a novel PET myocardial imaging agent. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:782–788.
    1. Yu M, Guaraldi MT, Mistry M, Kagan M, McDonald JL, Drew K, et al. BMS-747 158-02: a novel PET myocardial perfusion imaging agent. J Nucl Cardiol. 2007;14:789–798.
    1. Huisman M, Higuchi T, Reder S, Nekolla SG, Poethko T, Wester HJ, et al. Initial characterization of an 18F-labeled myocardial perfusion tracer. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:630–636.
    1. Sherif HM, Nekolla SG, Saraste A, Reder S, Yu M, Robinson S, et al. Simplified quantification of myocardial flow reserve with flurpiridaz F 18: validation with microspheres in a pig model. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:617–624.
    1. Yu M, Guaraldi M, Kagan M, Mistry M, McDonald J, Bozek J, et al. Assessment of 18F-labeled mitochondrial complex I inhibitors as PET myocardial perfusion imaging agents in rats, rabbits, and primates. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:63–72.
    1. Yu M, Bozek J, Guaraldi M, Kagan M, Azure M, Robinson SP. Cardiac imaging and safety evaluation of BMS747158, a novel PET myocardial perfusion imaging agent, in chronic myocardial compromised rabbits. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:631–636.
    1. Maddahi J, Czernin J, Lazewatsky J, Huang SC, Dahlbom M, Schelbert H, et al. Phase I, first-in-human study of BMS747158, a novel F-18 labeled tracer for myocardial perfusion PET imaging: dosimetry, biodistribution, safety, and imaging characteristics after a single injection at rest. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1490–1498.
    1. Maddahi J, Bengel F, Czernin J, Crane P, Dahlbom M, Schelbert H, et al. Dosimetry, biodistribution, and safety of flurpiridaz F18 in healthy subjects undergoing 2-day rest-stress PET myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:2018–2030. doi: 10.1007/s12350-018-01484-z.
    1. Berman DS, Maddahi J, Tamarappoo BK, Czernin J, Taillefer R, Udelson JE, et al. Phase II safety and clinical comparison with single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease: flurpiridaz F 18 positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:469–477.
    1. Moody JB, Poitrasson-Rivière A, Hagio T, Buckley C, Weinberg RL, Corbett JR, et al. Added value of myocardial blood flow using 18 F-flurpiridaz PET to diagnose coronary artery disease: the Flurpiridaz 301 Trial. J Nucl Cardiol. 2020. 10.1007/s12350-020-02034-2.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir