JNM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS 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 Herrero, P.
Right arrow Articles by Welch, M. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Herrero, P.
Right arrow Articles by Welch, M. J.

Assessment of Myocardial Blood Flow Using 15O-Water and 1-11C-Acetate in Rats with Small-Animal PET

Pilar Herrero, MS, Joonyoung Kim, PhD, Terry L. Sharp, RT(R), John A. Engelbach, Jason S. Lewis, PhD, Robert J. Gropler, MD and Michael J. Welch, PhD

Division of Radiological Sciences, Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri


Figure 1
View larger version (31K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1.  Factor images of LV, RV, and myocardium and their corresponding factors obtained from PET cardiac images of 15O-water (A) or 1-11C-acetate (B) from rats studied at rest.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 2.  Correlation between MBF estimated from 15O-water and MBF measured directly using radiolabeled microspheres (MIC) (A) and the corresponding residual plot (B). Mean residual error (MRE) was calculated as the average of the absolute difference between measured and predicted MBF values from the regression analysis in A. •, resting perfusion; {triangleup}, perfusion during dobutamine; {blacksquare}, perfusion during propranolol infusion.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (16K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 3.  Correlation between MBF estimates shown in Figure 2 after forcing the intercept to zero (A) and the corresponding residual plot (B). Mean residual error (MRE) was calculated as the average of the absolute difference between measured and predicted MBF values from the regression analysis in A. •, resting perfusion; {triangleup}, perfusion during dobutamine; {blacksquare}, perfusion during propranolol infusion. MIC = radiolabeled microspheres.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (25K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 4.  Representative blood and myocardial time–activity curves for 15O-water and 1-11C-acetate for low (A), medium (B), and high (C) MBF values. TAC = time–activity curve.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 5.  Correlation between K1 estimated from 1-11C-acetate and MBF estimated from 15O-water (A) and the corresponding residual plot as a function of 15O-water MBF (B). Mean residual error (MRE) was calculated as the average of the absolute difference between measured and predicted MBF values from the regression analysis in A.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (19K):

[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 6.  Correlation between MBF estimated from 1-11C-acetate and MBF estimated from 15O-water (A) and the corresponding residual plot as a function of 15O-water MBF (B). No significant residual bias was observed. Mean residual error (MRE) was calculated as the average of the absolute difference between measured and predicted MBF values from the regression analysis in A.

 




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS
JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Copyright © 2006 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine.