Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Continuing Education
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Corporate & Special Sales
    • Journal Claims
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Continuing Education
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Meeting Report

Patient motion quality assurance metrics for accurate myocardial blood flow quantification with rubidium-82 PET imaging

Jennifer Renaud, Alexis Poitrasson-Riviere, Jonathan Moody, Tomoe Hagio, James Corbett, Richard Weinberg, Venkatesh Murthy and Edward Ficaro
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2020, 61 (supplement 1) 1617;
Jennifer Renaud
1INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexis Poitrasson-Riviere
1INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jonathan Moody
1INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tomoe Hagio
1INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
James Corbett
2Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard Weinberg
2Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Venkatesh Murthy
2Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Edward Ficaro
2Frankel Cardiovascular Center, University of Michigan Ann Arbor MI United States
1INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions Ann Arbor MI United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

1617

Objectives: Dynamic rubidium-82 (Rb82) PET imaging enables quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF), providing incremental diagnostic and prognostic value over myocardial perfusion imaging [1]. However, patient motion leads to misalignment of left ventricular regions of interest in the dynamic image causing artifactually increased blood-to-tissue spillover in the blood phase frames, which results in overestimation of MBF if the motion is not corrected. The objective of this study was to identify quality assurance (QA) metrics that were predictive of patient motion, and consequently uncertainty in flow estimates. Methods: 225 consecutive patients that underwent dynamic rest/regadenoson-stress Rb82 PET/CT imaging were evaluated. A 12 MBq/kg weight-based dose of Rb82 was administered using a CardioGen-82 infusion system (Bracco Diagnostics, Monroe Township, NJ). 7-minute 3D list mode scans were acquired from the start of the tracer infusion on a Biograph mCT PET/CT scanner (Siemens Healthcare, Knoxville, TN). Iteratively reconstructed dynamic images (16 frames x 5s, 6x10s, 3x20s, 4x30s, 1x80s) were processed with Corridor4DM (INVIA Medical Imaging Solutions, Ann Arbor, MI) generating 2 datasets: one without (NoMoCo) and one with image-based automated patient motion correction (AutoMoCo) [2]. For both datasets, a 1-tissue compartment model (1TCM) was fit to sampled left ventricle (LV) blood pool and tissue input functions providing estimates of MBF. LV blood-to-tissue spillover fraction (FV), FV coefficient of variation (COV(FV)), and R2 and χ2, describing the goodness-of-fit of the 1TCM to the input data, were computed as potential QA metrics. From the AutoMoCo dataset, the mean magnitude of the motion vectors taken across all dynamic frames was calculated for each patient and correlated to the relative improvement (NoMoCo-AutoMoCo) in COV(FV), R2 and χ2 with motion correction. Blood pool and tissue phase motion vectors were isolated and also correlated with the potential QA metrics. Results are reported as mean ± SD. Paired t-tests were used to compare continuous parameters. Correlation coefficients were compared using Fisher’s Z-test. P < 0.05 was considered significant. Results: The population mean MBF estimate was lower with motion correction (MBF = 1.61 ± 0.86 ml/min/g) vs. without (MBF = 1.65 ± 0.94 ml/min/g, p<0.001). Significant decreases in FV (0.24 ± 0.07 vs 0.27 ± 0.08, p < 0.001) and COV(FV) (0.007 ± 0.004 vs 0.012 ± 0.01, p < 0.001) were observed when motion correction was applied, while no significant changes were seen in R2 and χ2 with motion correction. A moderate correlation was observed for COV(FV) with the motion vectors (R2 = 0.35) (Figure 1), but there was no correlation of the motion vectors observed with R2 and χ2 (R2 = 0.0094, 0.039). After isolating the blood pool phase, where motion effects on MBF are more pronounced than in the tissue phase, the correlation of COV(FV) with motion did not increase significantly (R2 = 0.38, p = 0.35). Correspondingly, there was no correlation of COV(FV) with isolated tissue phase motion (R2 = 0.005), confirming that motion effects occur mainly in the blood pool phase. There was still no correlation observed for R2 and χ2 with isolated blood (R2 = 0.012, 0.046) or tissue phase (R2 = 0.012, 0.046) motion. Conclusions: The variation of the LV blood-to-tissue spillover parameter, COV(FV), is most predictive of patient motion, providing a useful QA metric and indicator of the subsequent uncertainty in the compartment model-derived MBF estimates for Rb82 PET images. References: [1] Murthy VL et al. Clinical quantification of Myocardial Blood Flow Using PET: Joint Position Paper of the SNMMI Cardiovascular Council and the ASNC. J Nucl Cardiol 2018. Feb;25(1):269-297. [2] Lee BC et al. Automated dynamic motion correction using normalized gradient fields for 82rubidium PET myocardial blood flow quantification. J Nucl Cardiol 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12350-018-01471-4.

Previous
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 61, Issue supplement 1
May 1, 2020
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Patient motion quality assurance metrics for accurate myocardial blood flow quantification with rubidium-82 PET imaging
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Patient motion quality assurance metrics for accurate myocardial blood flow quantification with rubidium-82 PET imaging
Jennifer Renaud, Alexis Poitrasson-Riviere, Jonathan Moody, Tomoe Hagio, James Corbett, Richard Weinberg, Venkatesh Murthy, Edward Ficaro
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2020, 61 (supplement 1) 1617;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Patient motion quality assurance metrics for accurate myocardial blood flow quantification with rubidium-82 PET imaging
Jennifer Renaud, Alexis Poitrasson-Riviere, Jonathan Moody, Tomoe Hagio, James Corbett, Richard Weinberg, Venkatesh Murthy, Edward Ficaro
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2020, 61 (supplement 1) 1617;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Gallium-68-αvβ3-Integrin Antagonist Peptidomimetic (Ga-68 αvβ3-IAC) Positron Emission Tomography for Imaging and Staging of Patients with Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study.
  • SPECT Imaging with Tc-99m-labeled HYNIC-FAPI-04 to Extend the Differential Time Window in Evaluating Tumorous Fibrosis
  • Bio-Energetic Transfer from blood flow to mitochondria in High Intensity Interval versus Moderate Continuous Training in Post-PCI Rehab Patients.
Show more

Clinical Science (Poster Session)

  • Correlation of Global Cardiac Microcalcification with CHADS2and CHADS2-VASc Scores in Individuals At-risk for Cardiovascular Disease as Assessed by NaF-PET/CT
  • Comparison of 8-frame and 16-frame Gated PET Cardiac imaging for Quantitation of Left Ventricular Function
  • Investigating the agreement between invasive and non-invasive coronary measurements in patients with diabetes
Show more Clinical Science (Poster Session)

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire