用带运动校正的 CZT-SPECT 对心肌血流进行定量，并与 O-水 PET 进行比较。
Quantification of myocardial blood flow by CZT-SPECT with motion correction and comparison with O-water PET.
机构信息
Departments of Imaging and Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hokkaido University of Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan.
出版信息
J Nucl Cardiol. 2021 Aug;28(4):1477-1486. doi: 10.1007/s12350-019-01854-1. Epub 2019 Aug 26.
BACKGROUND
We compared quantification of MBF and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) with a 99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT to O-water PET.
METHODS
SPECT MBF for thirty patients in the WATERDAY study was re-analyzed by QPET software with motion correction and optimal placement of the arterial input function. O-water PET MBF was re-quantified using dedicated software. Inter-operator variability was assessed using repeatability coefficients (RPC).
RESULTS
Significant correlations were observed between global (r = 0.91, P < 0.001) and regional MBF (r = 0.86, P < 0.001) with SPECT compared to PET. Global MBF (rest 0.95 vs 1.05 ml/min/g, P = 0.07; stress 2.62 vs 2.68 mL/min/g, P = 0.17) and MFR (2.65 vs 2.75, P = 0.86) were similar between SPECT and PET. Rest (0.81 vs 0.98 mL/min/g, P = 0.03) and stress MBF (1.98 vs 2.61 mL/min/g, P = 0.01) in right coronary artery (RCA) were lower with SPECT compared to PET. However, MFR in the RCA territory was similar (2.54 vs 2.77, P = 0.21). The SPECT-PET RPC for global MBFs and MFR were 0.95 mL/min/g and 0.94, with inter-observer RPC of 0.59 mL/min/g and 0.74, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
MBF and MFR derived from CZT-SPECT with motion correction and optimal placement of the arterial input function showed good agreement with O-water PET, as well as low inter-operator variability.
背景
我们将 99mTc-sestamibi CZT-SPECT 测量的 MBF 和心肌血流储备（MFR）与 O-水 PET 进行了比较。
方法
对 WATERDAY 研究中的 30 例患者的 SPECT MBF 进行了重新分析，采用 QPET 软件进行运动校正和最佳动脉输入函数放置。使用专用软件重新定量 O-水 PET MBF。采用重复性系数（RPC）评估操作者间变异性。
结果
与 PET 相比，SPECT 显示整体（r=0.91，P<0.001）和区域 MBF（r=0.86，P<0.001）均具有显著相关性。静息时（0.95 比 1.05 ml/min/g，P=0.07；应激时 2.62 比 2.68 mL/min/g，P=0.17）和 MFR（2.65 比 2.75，P=0.86），SPECT 与 PET 相似。与 PET 相比，SPECT 显示右冠状动脉（RCA）的静息时（0.81 比 0.98 ml/min/g，P=0.03）和应激时 MBF（1.98 比 2.61 mL/min/g，P=0.01）较低。然而，RCA 区域的 MFR 相似（2.54 比 2.77，P=0.21）。整体 MBF 和 MFR 的 SPECT-PET RPC 分别为 0.95 ml/min/g 和 0.94，观察者间 RPC 分别为 0.59 ml/min/g 和 0.74。
结论
运动校正和最佳动脉输入函数放置的 CZT-SPECT 衍生的 MBF 和 MFR 与 O-水 PET 具有良好的一致性，且操作者间变异性低。
Zotero 插件