Cargando…

Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) estimation using adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) can be challenging. The short half-life of adenosine and the guideline-recommended adenosine infusion stop during Rubidium-82 acquisition protocol may affect the accuracy and re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lassen, Martin Lyngby, Wissenberg, Mads, Byrne, Christina, Kjaer, Andreas, Hasbak, Philip
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9834342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35415824
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12350-022-02946-1
_version_ 1784868441175359488
author Lassen, Martin Lyngby
Wissenberg, Mads
Byrne, Christina
Kjaer, Andreas
Hasbak, Philip
author_facet Lassen, Martin Lyngby
Wissenberg, Mads
Byrne, Christina
Kjaer, Andreas
Hasbak, Philip
author_sort Lassen, Martin Lyngby
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) estimation using adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) can be challenging. The short half-life of adenosine and the guideline-recommended adenosine infusion stop during Rubidium-82 acquisition protocol may affect the accuracy and repeatability of the LVEF measures. METHODS: This study comprised 25 healthy volunteers (median age 23 years) who underwent repeat myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) sessions employing Rubidium-82 PET/CT. A guideline-recommended reconstruction protocol was used for both rest and adenosine stress MPI (150-360 s post-radiotracer injection, standard(recon)). For the stress MPI protocol, two additional reconstruction protocols were considered; one was employing 60 seconds data (150-210 seconds, short(fixed)) and the other a dynamic frame window based on the bolus arrival of Rubidium-82 in the heart until 210 seconds (x-210 seconds, short(individual)). We report rest and stress LVEF, the LVEF reserve, and the LVEF reserve repeatability. RESULTS: Differences in the LVEF assessments were observed between the guideline recommended and alternative reconstruction protocol (LVEF stress MPI: standard(recon) = 68 ± 7%, short(fixed) = 71 ± 7% (P = .08), short(individual) = 72 ± 7% (P = .04)), and the LVEF reserve was reduced for the guideline-recommended protocol (standard(recon) = 7.8 ± 3.5, short(fixed) = 10.1 ± 3.7, short(individual) = 10.5 ± 3.6, all P < .001). The best repeatability measures were obtained for the short(individual) protocol (repeatability: standard(recon) = 45.3%, short(fixed) = 41.2%, short(individual) = 31.7%). CONCLUSION: We recommend using the short(individual) reconstruction protocol for improved LVEF repeatability and reserve assessment. Alternatively, in centers with limited technical support we recommend the use of the short(fixed) protocol. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12350-022-02946-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9834342
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98343422023-01-13 Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols Lassen, Martin Lyngby Wissenberg, Mads Byrne, Christina Kjaer, Andreas Hasbak, Philip J Nucl Cardiol Original Article BACKGROUND: Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) estimation using adenosine stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) can be challenging. The short half-life of adenosine and the guideline-recommended adenosine infusion stop during Rubidium-82 acquisition protocol may affect the accuracy and repeatability of the LVEF measures. METHODS: This study comprised 25 healthy volunteers (median age 23 years) who underwent repeat myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) sessions employing Rubidium-82 PET/CT. A guideline-recommended reconstruction protocol was used for both rest and adenosine stress MPI (150-360 s post-radiotracer injection, standard(recon)). For the stress MPI protocol, two additional reconstruction protocols were considered; one was employing 60 seconds data (150-210 seconds, short(fixed)) and the other a dynamic frame window based on the bolus arrival of Rubidium-82 in the heart until 210 seconds (x-210 seconds, short(individual)). We report rest and stress LVEF, the LVEF reserve, and the LVEF reserve repeatability. RESULTS: Differences in the LVEF assessments were observed between the guideline recommended and alternative reconstruction protocol (LVEF stress MPI: standard(recon) = 68 ± 7%, short(fixed) = 71 ± 7% (P = .08), short(individual) = 72 ± 7% (P = .04)), and the LVEF reserve was reduced for the guideline-recommended protocol (standard(recon) = 7.8 ± 3.5, short(fixed) = 10.1 ± 3.7, short(individual) = 10.5 ± 3.6, all P < .001). The best repeatability measures were obtained for the short(individual) protocol (repeatability: standard(recon) = 45.3%, short(fixed) = 41.2%, short(individual) = 31.7%). CONCLUSION: We recommend using the short(individual) reconstruction protocol for improved LVEF repeatability and reserve assessment. Alternatively, in centers with limited technical support we recommend the use of the short(fixed) protocol. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12350-022-02946-1. Springer International Publishing 2022-04-12 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9834342/ /pubmed/35415824 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12350-022-02946-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Lassen, Martin Lyngby
Wissenberg, Mads
Byrne, Christina
Kjaer, Andreas
Hasbak, Philip
Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title_full Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title_fullStr Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title_full_unstemmed Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title_short Optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)Rubidium-PET scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
title_sort optimization of the left ventricle ejection fraction estimate obtained during cardiac adenosine stress (82)rubidium-pet scanning: impact of different reconstruction protocols
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9834342/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35415824
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12350-022-02946-1
work_keys_str_mv AT lassenmartinlyngby optimizationoftheleftventricleejectionfractionestimateobtainedduringcardiacadenosinestress82rubidiumpetscanningimpactofdifferentreconstructionprotocols
AT wissenbergmads optimizationoftheleftventricleejectionfractionestimateobtainedduringcardiacadenosinestress82rubidiumpetscanningimpactofdifferentreconstructionprotocols
AT byrnechristina optimizationoftheleftventricleejectionfractionestimateobtainedduringcardiacadenosinestress82rubidiumpetscanningimpactofdifferentreconstructionprotocols
AT kjaerandreas optimizationoftheleftventricleejectionfractionestimateobtainedduringcardiacadenosinestress82rubidiumpetscanningimpactofdifferentreconstructionprotocols
AT hasbakphilip optimizationoftheleftventricleejectionfractionestimateobtainedduringcardiacadenosinestress82rubidiumpetscanningimpactofdifferentreconstructionprotocols