Katahira Masataka, Fukushima Kenji, Endo Keiichiro, Kawakubo Masateru, Ukon Naoyuki, Yamakuni Ryo, Kiko Takatoyo, Shimizu Takeshi, Ishii Shiro, Yamaki Takayoshi, Nagao Michinobu, Ito Hiroshi, Takeishi Yasuchika
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, Fukushima, Japan.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Fukushima Medical University School of Medicine, 1 Hikarigaoka, Fukushima, 960-1295, Japan.
Ann Nucl Med. 2025 Mar;39(3):285-294. doi: 10.1007/s12149-024-01997-3. Epub 2024 Dec 2.
We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of positron emission tomography feature tracking (PETFT) for assessing endocardial wall strain by comparing it with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-derived feature tracking (CMRFT).
We enrolled 83 consecutive patients with coronary artery disease who underwent rest-pharmacologic stress N-ammonia PETMR (67 males, mean age 66 years). PETFT and CMRFT were obtained through simultaneous acquisition with electrocardiography-gated PET and cine-CMR. Global longitudinal and circumferential strain (GLS and GCS) were calculated. Correlations and Bland-Altman plots were employed to evaluate associations, bias, and 95% limit of agreement (LOA) between PETFT and CMRFT.
PETFT and CMRFT showed significant correlations (R = 0.57 [95% CI 0.41-0.70], R = 0.71 [95% CI 0.58-0.80], R = 0.59 [95% CI 0.43-0.71], and R = 0.69 [95% CI 0.56-0.79] for rest GLS, rest GCS, stress GLS, and stress GCS, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). Bland-Altman plot showed good agreements, while a systematic error was observed (LOA -10.2-8.8, -8.7-10.7, -10.5-8.5, and -9.4-12.0; bias -0.7, 1.0, -1.0, and 1.3; for rest GLS, rest GCS, stress GLS, and stress GCS; respectively).
PETFT has been identified as a feasible technique compared to CMRFT, highlighting its potential as a novel tool for assessing wall strain in routine clinical settings.
通过将正电子发射断层扫描特征追踪（PETFT）与心脏磁共振（CMR）衍生的特征追踪（CMRFT）进行比较，评估其用于评估心内膜壁应变的可行性。
我们连续纳入了83例接受静息-药物负荷N-氨PETMR检查的冠心病患者（67例男性，平均年龄66岁）。通过同步采集心电图门控PET和电影CMR获得PETFT和CMRFT。计算整体纵向和圆周应变（GLS和GCS）。采用相关性分析和Bland-Altman图来评估PETFT和CMRFT之间的相关性、偏差和95%一致性界限（LOA）。
PETFT和CMRFT显示出显著相关性（静息GLS、静息GCS、负荷GLS和负荷GCS的R分别为0.57[95%CI 0.41 - 0.70]、0.71[95%CI 0.58 - 0.80]、0.59[95%CI 0.43 - 0.71]和0.69[95%CI 0.56 - 0.79]；所有p均<0.001）。Bland-Altman图显示一致性良好，但存在系统误差（静息GLS、静息GCS、负荷GLS和负荷GCS的LOA分别为-10.2 - 8.8、-8.7 - 10.7、-10.5 - 8.5和-9.4 - 12.0；偏差分别为-0.7、1.0、-1.0和1.3）。
与CMRFT相比，PETFT已被确定为一种可行的技术，突出了其作为常规临床环境中评估壁应变的新型工具的潜力。
