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
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • 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
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Continuing Education
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Meeting ReportClinical Science

Comparison of 3 tracer kinetic models for myocardial perfusion quantification by dynamic 13N-ammonia PET imaging

Yingqi Hu, Ruonan Wang, Chuxin Zhang, Shihao Huangfu, Qi Yao and Sijin Li
Journal of Nuclear Medicine June 2022, 63 (supplement 2) 3381;
Yingqi Hu
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ruonan Wang
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Chuxin Zhang
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shihao Huangfu
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Qi Yao
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sijin Li
1First Hospital of Shanxi Medical University
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

3381

Introduction: One-compartment model and two-compartment model are two commonly used models to analyze time-activity curves for measurement of myocardial blood flow (MBF) by dynamic 13N-ammonia positron emission tomography (PET). We aimed to compare 3 PMod models (de Grado Model, 2 Compartments Model and UCLA 2 Parameters Model) for quantification of MBF and myocardial flow reserve (MFR).

Methods: We retrospectively enrolled 53 cases ( 45 coronary microvascular dysfunction patients, 3 obstructive coronary artery disease patients and 5 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention). All patients underwent dynamic 13N-ammonia PET imaging at rest and during vasodilation by adenosine. Rest MBF, stress MBF and MFR were calculated using 3 PMod models respectively.

Results: There were significant differences among 3 tracer kinetic models for calculating rest MBF, stress MBF and MFR (all P<0.05). For rest MBF, the value of 2 Compartments Model highest [ 1.27( 0.39)] and there was no significant difference between the other two models (P>0.05). For stress MBF, the value of de Grado Model lowest [ 2.41( 0.92)] and there was no significant difference between the other two models (P>0.05). For MFR, the value of UCLA 2 Parameters Model highest [ 2.90( 1.07)] and there was no significant difference between the other two models (P>0.05). However, the correlation was good among the 3 models for calculation of rest MBF (ρ from 0.541 to 0.878, all P< 0.05), stress MBF (ρ from 0.762 to 0.918, all P< 0.05) , and MFR (ρ from 0.668 to 0.913, all P< 0.05). Additionally, the agreement among 3 tracer kinetic models for calculating rest MBF, stress MBF and MFR was not good.

Conclusions: The 3 tracer kinetic models of PMod can not be used interchangeably for myocardial perfusion quantification by dynamic 13N-ammonia PET imaging.

Previous
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 63, Issue supplement 2
June 1, 2022
  • 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.
Comparison of 3 tracer kinetic models for myocardial perfusion quantification by dynamic 13N-ammonia 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
Comparison of 3 tracer kinetic models for myocardial perfusion quantification by dynamic 13N-ammonia PET imaging
Yingqi Hu, Ruonan Wang, Chuxin Zhang, Shihao Huangfu, Qi Yao, Sijin Li
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jun 2022, 63 (supplement 2) 3381;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Comparison of 3 tracer kinetic models for myocardial perfusion quantification by dynamic 13N-ammonia PET imaging
Yingqi Hu, Ruonan Wang, Chuxin Zhang, Shihao Huangfu, Qi Yao, Sijin Li
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jun 2022, 63 (supplement 2) 3381;
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

  • Quantitative analysis of SPECT lung ventilation/perfusion imaging in the efficacy evaluation of balloon pulmonary angioplasty in the treatment of chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension
  • Isolated and non-isolated cardiac sarcoidosis, with differences in cardiac FDG uptake but similar prognosis
  • Cardiac neuroendocrine tumor metastases on 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT
Show more Clinical Science

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire