These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison between N13NH3-PET and 99mTc-Tetrofosmin-CZT SPECT in the evaluation of absolute myocardial blood flow and flow reserve.
    Author: Giubbini R, Bertoli M, Durmo R, Bonacina M, Peli A, Faggiano I, Albano D, Milan E, Stern E, Paghera B, Rodella C, Cerudelli E, Gazzilli M, Dondi F, Bertagna F, Camoni L.
    Journal: J Nucl Cardiol; 2021 Oct; 28(5):1906-1918. PubMed ID: 31728817.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: PET/CT is the standard for quantitative assessments of myocardial blood flow (MBF), but it requires short-lived-tracers, costly, and not widely available. SPECT with Cadmium Zinc Telluride (CZT) detectors allows dynamic acquisition and quantitation of MBF. The study aims were to compare MBF measurements by 99mTc-tetrofosmin-CZT to N13NH3 PET/CT after regadenoson-induced coronary hyperemia and to evaluate the effect of attenuation correction (AC). METHODS: 54 patients were evaluated at rest and during vasodilation by 99mTc-tetrofosmin-CZT and N13NH3 PET/CT within 2 weeks. MBF and MBF reserve (MFR) were measured by CZT with or without AC (NAC). RESULTS: The global rest MBF was 0.76 ± 0.19 mL/min/gr by PET and 0.76 ± 0.24 by AC-CZT (P = NS) and 1.14 ± 0.4 by NAC-CZT (P < 0.001 vs PET and AC-CZT). Stress MBF was higher when measured by PET than AC-CZT (1.87 ± 0.45 vs 1.62 ± 0.68 mL/min/gr, P < 0.0008), but lower than NAC-CZT (2.36 ± 1.1, P < 0.0003). The MBF reserve ratio (MFR) was higher by PET than AC-CZT (2.52 ± 0.56 vs 2.22 ± 1 (P < 0.009) and NAC-CZT (2.18 ± 1.0, P < 0.004). Linear regression was better between PET (MFR and stress MBF) and AC-CZT than between PET and NAC-CZT. ROC curve analysis showed the significant ability of AC-CZT to predict MFR < 2 and stress MBF < 1.7 (AUC = 0.75 and 0.82 respectively) and to differentiate between normal and CAD patients (AUC = 0.747 and 0.892 for MFR and stress MBF, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show a reasonable correlation between MBF and MFR measured by N13NH3-PET and 99mTc-Tetrofosmin-CZT SPECT. NAC-CZT overestimates MBF. AC is recommended when using CZT for measuring MBF.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]