JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JNM
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Brogsitter, C.
Right arrow Articles by Burchert, W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Brogsitter, C.
Right arrow Articles by Burchert, W.

18F-FDG PET for Detecting Myocardial Viability: Validation of 3D Data Acquisition

Claudia Brogsitter, MD1,2, Thomas Grüning, MD3, Reiner Weise, PhD1, Peter Wielepp, MD1, Oliver Lindner, MD1, Reiner Körfer, MD4 and Wolfgang Burchert, MD1

1 Institute of Molecular Biophysics, Radiopharmacy and Nuclear Medicine, Heart and Diabetes Center, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany
2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany
3 Department of Nuclear Medicine, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, United Kingdom
4 Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Heart and Diabetes Center, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany



View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
 
FIGURE 1. Absolute activity concentration (Bq/mL) measured in each segment with 2D-G (A), 3D-10 (B), and 3D-5 (C) protocols, compared with 2D-NG acquisition. Each dot represents 1 segment, and a different color represents each of the 21 patients. Corresponding residual plots are in left upper corners. Values for slope of curve and Pearson correlation coefficient were, respectively, 1.04 and 0.98 for 2D-G, 0.97 and 0.97 for 3D-10, and 0.97 and 0.96 for 3D-5.

 


View larger version (12K):

[in a new window]
 
FIGURE 2. Relative activity concentration in each segment with 2D-G (A), 3D-10 (B), and 3D-5 (C) protocols, compared with 2D-NG acquisition. Segment with maximum absolute activity concentration in each patient equals 100%. Each dot represents 1 segment, and a different color represents each of the 20 patients. One patient with hibernating myocardium confirmed by 13NH3 PET was excluded.

 


View larger version (61K):

[in a new window]
 
FIGURE 3. Regional variation of absolute activity concentration in each of 20 segments measured with 2D-NG, 2D-G, 3D-10, and 3D-5 protocols. Polar maps are shown for each protocol, and absolute activity concentrations (Bq/mL) have been plotted for each segment. Two representative patients (A and B) are shown.

 


View larger version (11K):

[in a new window]
 
FIGURE 4. Mean regional activity distribution in all 20 segments measured with 2D-G (A), 3D-10 (B), and 3D-5 (C) protocols, expressed as a ratio to 2D-NG values.

 


View larger version (10K):

[in a new window]
 
FIGURE 5. (A) Comparison of LVEF measured with 2D-G, 3D-10, and 3D-5 protocols. (B) Corresponding Bland–Altman plot. Slope of curve, {2D,3D} intercept, and Pearson correlation coefficient were 1.02, {0.4,-0.4}, and 0.96, respectively, for 3D-10 and 0.91, {-1.3,1.2}, and 0.96, respectively, for 3D-5.

 





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2005 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.