正电子发射检测与计算机断层扫描心肌灌注容量和左心室射血分数的标准化:与心脏磁共振成像的比较。

European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice Pub Date : 2023-06-16 eCollection Date: 2023-05-01 DOI:10.1093/ehjimp/qyad006
Tiffany A Dong, Bryan Q Abadie, Erika Hutt Centeno, Christine L Jellis, Paul C Cremer, Wael A Jaber
{"title":"正电子发射检测与计算机断层扫描心肌灌注容量和左心室射血分数的标准化:与心脏磁共振成像的比较。","authors":"Tiffany A Dong, Bryan Q Abadie, Erika Hutt Centeno, Christine L Jellis, Paul C Cremer, Wael A Jaber","doi":"10.1093/ehjimp/qyad006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Gated positron emission testing with computed tomography (PET-CT) yields left ventricular (LV) volume analysis along with perfusion analysis. The correlation between PET-CT volumes and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) volumes remains unknown. Understanding of the accuracy of these volumes and ejection fractions (EF) by PET is clinically relevant, particularly in the sarcoid population where patients receive initial diagnostic CMR and then are followed by PET for inflammation. 89 patients undergoing cardiac sarcoidosis evaluation with both rest PET-CT and CMR within approximately 1 year were identified at Cleveland Clinic from 2011 to 2021. LV volumes and EF were collected. Linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses were performed. Mean PET-CT derived left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 46 ± 16% with mean LV end diastolic volume (LVEDV) of 127 ± 60 mL and mean LV end systolic volume (LVESV) of 75 ± 54 mL. Mean CMR-derived LVEF was 47 ± 15% with mean LVEDV of 189 ± 61 mL and mean LVESV of 106 ± 60 mL. Pearson correlation coefficient with standard measurements was 0.85 for EF, 0.80 for LVEDV, and 0.86 for LVESV. In our cohort, there is an excellent correlation of LVEF between PET-CT and CMR with a mean difference of 1.1% and a good correlation of volumes between these two imaging modalities. This has potential clinical implications when judging LVEF qualifications for medical and device therapies although future larger validation cohorts are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":94317,"journal":{"name":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195689/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards standardization of positron emission testing with computed tomography myocardial perfusion volumes and left ventricular ejection fraction: comparison with cardiac MRI.\",\"authors\":\"Tiffany A Dong, Bryan Q Abadie, Erika Hutt Centeno, Christine L Jellis, Paul C Cremer, Wael A Jaber\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ehjimp/qyad006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Gated positron emission testing with computed tomography (PET-CT) yields left ventricular (LV) volume analysis along with perfusion analysis. The correlation between PET-CT volumes and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) volumes remains unknown. Understanding of the accuracy of these volumes and ejection fractions (EF) by PET is clinically relevant, particularly in the sarcoid population where patients receive initial diagnostic CMR and then are followed by PET for inflammation. 89 patients undergoing cardiac sarcoidosis evaluation with both rest PET-CT and CMR within approximately 1 year were identified at Cleveland Clinic from 2011 to 2021. LV volumes and EF were collected. Linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses were performed. Mean PET-CT derived left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 46 ± 16% with mean LV end diastolic volume (LVEDV) of 127 ± 60 mL and mean LV end systolic volume (LVESV) of 75 ± 54 mL. Mean CMR-derived LVEF was 47 ± 15% with mean LVEDV of 189 ± 61 mL and mean LVESV of 106 ± 60 mL. Pearson correlation coefficient with standard measurements was 0.85 for EF, 0.80 for LVEDV, and 0.86 for LVESV. In our cohort, there is an excellent correlation of LVEF between PET-CT and CMR with a mean difference of 1.1% and a good correlation of volumes between these two imaging modalities. This has potential clinical implications when judging LVEF qualifications for medical and device therapies although future larger validation cohorts are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11195689/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyad006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjimp/qyad006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

计算机断层扫描选通正电子发射检测(PET-CT)可进行左心室(LV)容积分析和灌注分析。PET-CT 容量与心脏磁共振成像(CMR)容量之间的相关性仍然未知。通过 PET 了解这些容积和射血分数 (EF) 的准确性与临床息息相关,尤其是在肉样瘤人群中,患者在接受最初的 CMR 诊断后,还要接受 PET 的炎症随访。克利夫兰诊所在 2011 年至 2021 年期间确定了 89 名在约 1 年内接受静息 PET-CT 和 CMR 心脏肉瘤病评估的患者。收集了左心室容积和EF。进行了线性回归和 Bland-Altman 分析。PET-CT 得出的左心室射血分数(LVEF)平均为 46 ± 16%,左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)平均为 127 ± 60 mL,左心室收缩末期容积(LVESV)平均为 75 ± 54 mL。CMR 导出的平均 LVEF 为 47 ± 15%,平均 LVEDV 为 189 ± 61 mL,平均 LVESV 为 106 ± 60 mL。EF 与标准测量值的皮尔逊相关系数为 0.85,LVEDV 为 0.80,LVESV 为 0.86。在我们的队列中,PET-CT 和 CMR 之间 LVEF 的相关性非常好,平均差异为 1.1%,这两种成像模式之间的容积相关性也很好。这对于判断 LVEF 是否符合医疗和设备疗法的要求具有潜在的临床意义,但未来还需要更大规模的验证队列。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Towards standardization of positron emission testing with computed tomography myocardial perfusion volumes and left ventricular ejection fraction: comparison with cardiac MRI.

Gated positron emission testing with computed tomography (PET-CT) yields left ventricular (LV) volume analysis along with perfusion analysis. The correlation between PET-CT volumes and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) volumes remains unknown. Understanding of the accuracy of these volumes and ejection fractions (EF) by PET is clinically relevant, particularly in the sarcoid population where patients receive initial diagnostic CMR and then are followed by PET for inflammation. 89 patients undergoing cardiac sarcoidosis evaluation with both rest PET-CT and CMR within approximately 1 year were identified at Cleveland Clinic from 2011 to 2021. LV volumes and EF were collected. Linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses were performed. Mean PET-CT derived left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was 46 ± 16% with mean LV end diastolic volume (LVEDV) of 127 ± 60 mL and mean LV end systolic volume (LVESV) of 75 ± 54 mL. Mean CMR-derived LVEF was 47 ± 15% with mean LVEDV of 189 ± 61 mL and mean LVESV of 106 ± 60 mL. Pearson correlation coefficient with standard measurements was 0.85 for EF, 0.80 for LVEDV, and 0.86 for LVESV. In our cohort, there is an excellent correlation of LVEF between PET-CT and CMR with a mean difference of 1.1% and a good correlation of volumes between these two imaging modalities. This has potential clinical implications when judging LVEF qualifications for medical and device therapies although future larger validation cohorts are warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信