TY - JOUR T1 - <sup>18</sup>F-FDG Positron Emission Tomography in Myocardial Viability Assessment: A Practical and Time Efficient Protocol JF - Journal of Nuclear Medicine JO - J Nucl Med DO - 10.2967/jnumed.121.262432 SP - jnumed.121.262432 AU - Joyce Mhlanga AU - Adeel Haq AU - Paul Derenoncourt AU - Anita Bhandiwad AU - Richard Laforest AU - Barry Siegel AU - Farrokh Dehdashti AU - Robert J Gropler AU - Thomas Hellmut Schindler Y1 - 2021/09/01 UR - http://jnm.snmjournals.org/content/early/2021/09/09/jnumed.121.262432.abstract N2 - We assessed image quality using a practical and time-efficient protocol for intravenous glucose loading and insulin injection prior to administration of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) for PET myocardial viability evaluation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: Metabolic preparation period (MPP) or optimal cardiac 18F-FDG uptake was determined from the time of intravenous infusion of 12.5 or 25 gram of 50% dextrose to the time of 18F-FDG injection. Cardiac 18F-FDG image quality was evaluated according to a 5-point scoring system (5=excellent to 1=non-diagnostic) by two independent observers. In cases of disagreement, consensus was achieved in a joint reading. Fifteen patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy, who underwent oral glucose loading and i.v. insulin administration, served as reference for MPP comparisons. Results: 59 consecutive patients (age: 63±10yrs, men n = 48 and women n = 11) underwent rest 99mTc-tetrofosmin SPECT/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for the evaluation of myocardial viability. FDG image quality was scored as excellent in 42%, very good in 36%, good in 17%, fair in 3%, and non-diagnostic in 2%. Comparing diabetic and non-diabetic patients, the quality scores were excellent in 29% vs. 76% , very good in 41% vs. 18%, good in 24% vs. 6%, fair in 4% vs. 0% , and non-diagnostic in 2% vs. 0%. The mean (±SD) quality score was 4.12±0.95 and overall it was better in non-diabetic than in diabetic patients (4.71±0.59 vs 3.88±0.96; p&lt;0.0001). Notably, the average MPP was significantly less with i.v. glucose loading when compared to oral glucose loading (51±15 vs. 132±29 min; p&lt;0.0001), paralleled by higher insulin doses (6.3 ± 2.2 vs. 2.0 ± 1.69 U; p&lt;0.001). Conclusion: Using a practical and time efficient protocol for i.v. glucose loading and insulin administration prior to 18F-FDG injection reduces the MPP by 61% as compared to oral glucose challenge that affords good-to-excellent image quality in 95% of ischemic cardiomyopathy patients. ER -