uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Calculation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from dynamic cardiac-gated (15)O-water PET/CT: 5D-PET.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Radiology.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Medicine and Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Surgical Sciences, Radiology.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: EJNMMI Physics, ISSN 2197-7364, E-ISSN 2191-219X, Vol. 4, no 1, 26Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Quantitative measurement of myocardial blood flow (MBF) is of increasing interest in the clinical assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). (15)O-water positron emission tomography (PET) is considered the gold standard for non-invasive MBF measurements. However, calculation of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) is not possible from standard (15)O-water uptake images. The purpose of the present work was to investigate the possibility of calculating LV volumes and LVEF from cardiac-gated parametric blood volume (V B) (15)O-water images and from first pass (FP) images. Sixteen patients with mitral or aortic regurgitation underwent an eight-gate dynamic cardiac-gated (15)O-water PET/CT scan and cardiac MRI. V B and FP images were generated for each gate. Calculations of end-systolic volume (ESV), end-diastolic volume (EDV), stroke volume (SV) and LVEF were performed with automatic segmentation of V B and FP images, using commercially available software. LV volumes and LVEF were calculated with surface-, count-, and volume-based methods, and the results were compared with gold standard MRI.

RESULTS: Using V B images, high correlations between PET and MRI ESV (r = 0.89, p < 0.001), EDV (r = 0.85, p < 0.001), SV (r = 0.74, p = 0.006) and LVEF (r = 0.72, p = 0.008) were found for the volume-based method. Correlations for FP images were slightly, but not significantly, lower than those for V B images when compared to MRI. Surface- and count-based methods showed no significant difference compared with the volume-based correlations with MRI. The volume-based method showed the best agreement with MRI with no significant difference on average for EDV and LVEF but with an overestimation of values for ESV (14%, p = 0.005) and SV (18%, p = 0.004) when using V B images. Using FP images, none of the parameters showed a significant difference from MRI. Inter-operator repeatability was excellent for all parameters (ICC > 0.86, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION: Calculation of LV volumes and LVEF from dynamic (15)O-water PET is feasible and shows good correlation with MRI. However, the analysis method is laborious, and future work is needed for more automation to make the method more easily applicable in a clinical setting.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017. Vol. 4, no 1, 26
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-333781DOI: 10.1186/s40658-017-0195-2PubMedID: 29138942OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-333781DiVA: diva2:1157732
Available from: 2017-11-16 Created: 2017-11-16 Last updated: 2017-11-16

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Nordström, JonnyKero, TanjaSörensen, JensLubberink, Mark
By organisation
Radiology
In the same journal
EJNMMI Physics
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 21 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf