TY - JOUR
T1 - Test-retest repeatability and software reproducibility of myocardial flow measurements using rest/adenosine stress Rubidium-82 PET/CT with and without motion correction in healthy young volunteers
AU - Byrne, Christina
AU - Kjaer, Andreas
AU - Olsen, Naja Enevold
AU - Forman, Julie Lyng
AU - Hasbak, Philip
N1 - © 2020. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.
PY - 2021/12
Y1 - 2021/12
N2 - BACKGROUND: Myocardial flow reserve (MFR) assessment with cardiac positron emission computed tomography (PET/CT) is well established, and quantification relies on commercial software packages. However, for reliable use, repeatability and reproducibility are important. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate and compare between scans and software packages the repeatability and reproducibility of 82Rb-PET/CT estimated MFR.METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty healthy volunteers completed two 82Rb-PET/CT rest and adenosine stress scans. syngo.MBF (Siemens), quantitative-gated SPECT (QGS) (Cedars-Sinai), and Corridor4DM (4DM) were used for analyses. Motion correction was available for 4DM. Fifty percent were men and age was 24 ± 4 years (mean ± SD). Repeatability of MFR varied between scans. syngo.MBF: mean difference (95% CI) 0.26 (- 0.03 to 0.54), P = 0.07, limits of agreement (LoA): - 1.43 to 1.95; QGS: 0.19 (- 0.08 to 0.46), P = 0.15, LoA: - 1.38 to 1.76; 4DM: 0.08 (- 0.17 to 0.34), P = 0.50, LoA: - 1.37 to 1.53; and 4DM motion corrected: 0.17 (- 0.17 to 0.51), P = 0.32, LoA: - 1.89 to 2.22. MFR was higher using 4DM +/- motion correction compared with syngo.MBF and QGS (all P < 0.0001). Concordance between syngo.MBF and QGS was high (P = 0.83).CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of MFR varied for the different software. The highest concordance between MFRs was found between syngo.MBF and QGS.
AB - BACKGROUND: Myocardial flow reserve (MFR) assessment with cardiac positron emission computed tomography (PET/CT) is well established, and quantification relies on commercial software packages. However, for reliable use, repeatability and reproducibility are important. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate and compare between scans and software packages the repeatability and reproducibility of 82Rb-PET/CT estimated MFR.METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty healthy volunteers completed two 82Rb-PET/CT rest and adenosine stress scans. syngo.MBF (Siemens), quantitative-gated SPECT (QGS) (Cedars-Sinai), and Corridor4DM (4DM) were used for analyses. Motion correction was available for 4DM. Fifty percent were men and age was 24 ± 4 years (mean ± SD). Repeatability of MFR varied between scans. syngo.MBF: mean difference (95% CI) 0.26 (- 0.03 to 0.54), P = 0.07, limits of agreement (LoA): - 1.43 to 1.95; QGS: 0.19 (- 0.08 to 0.46), P = 0.15, LoA: - 1.38 to 1.76; 4DM: 0.08 (- 0.17 to 0.34), P = 0.50, LoA: - 1.37 to 1.53; and 4DM motion corrected: 0.17 (- 0.17 to 0.51), P = 0.32, LoA: - 1.89 to 2.22. MFR was higher using 4DM +/- motion correction compared with syngo.MBF and QGS (all P < 0.0001). Concordance between syngo.MBF and QGS was high (P = 0.83).CONCLUSIONS: Reproducibility of MFR varied for the different software. The highest concordance between MFRs was found between syngo.MBF and QGS.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85084373193&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s12350-020-02140-1
DO - 10.1007/s12350-020-02140-1
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 32390111
SN - 1071-3581
VL - 28
SP - 2860
EP - 2871
JO - Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology
JF - Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology
IS - 6
ER -