Elsevier

Journal of Nuclear Cardiology

Volume 13, Issue 6, November 2006, Pages e121-e151
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology

Online guideline
Positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion and glucose metabolism imaging

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2006.08.009Get rights and content

Introduction

Cardiac positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is a well-validated, reimbursable means to assess myocardial perfusion, left ventricular (LV) function, and viability. Presently, there is a proliferation of PET and PET/computed tomography (CT) instrumentation as well as an increase in educational programs that specifically address PET and PET/CT imaging. Technologists performing PET scans as well as physicians interpreting them should have a sound knowledge of recommended standards for the performance, interpretation, and quality control (QC) of cardiac PET in order to provide accurate and clinically relevant information to referring physicians, facilitating optimal patient management.

These guidelines are an update of an earlier version of these guidelines that have been developed by the Quality Assurance Committee of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.1, 2 The task of the Committee has been to document state-of-the-art PET applications and protocols approved by experts in the field and distribute these protocols to the nuclear cardiology community. It is recognized that PET and PET/CT imaging is evolving rapidly and that these recommendations may need further revision in the near future.

Part 1, “Patient Preparation and Data Acquisition,” addresses the instrumentation and protocols recommended to yield technically adequate and clinically meaningful cardiac PET scans. This section includes detailed explanations of patient preparation options, recommended QC parameters, and scan acquisition and processing techniques. Within this document, items judged to be required are indicated as such. “Preferred” means that the parameter value listed is expected to provide the best results and its selection is strongly recommended. “Standard” means that the parameter value listed represents methodology judged to be standard by the consensus of the committee; its utilization is recommended, but other techniques may also be valid. “Acceptable” means that the parameter value listed is a valid alternative to “Standard.” Techniques termed “Optional” indicate that the parameter value listed may be used or another acceptable parameter may be substituted.

Part 2, “Interpretation and Reporting,” provides a systematic approach to QC, display, interpretation, and reporting of cardiac PET scans. Both subjective and objective semiquantitative interpretive methods to evaluate myocardial perfusion and viability are described. The Committee recognizes that all of these options may not be available on computer workstations presently provided commercially. Therefore such recommendations may be considered as general guidelines to direct the nuclear physician’s scan interpretation in a detailed and organized fashion.

This publication is designed to provide imaging guidelines for those physicians and technologists who are qualified in the practice of nuclear cardiology. Although care has been taken to ensure that information supplied is accurate, representing the consensus of experts, it should not be considered as medical advice or a professional service, since specific guidelines are partly instrument-dependent, and the technology of PET and PET/CT imaging is evolving rapidly. The imaging guidelines described in this publication should not be used in clinical studies at any institution until they have been reviewed and approved by qualified physicians and technologists from that institution.

Section snippets

A. General Comments

There is now an extensive infrastructure in PET imaging, with more than 1000 installed PET and PET/CT cameras in North America, spurred by their successful use in clinical oncology. A large number of PET scanners are continuing to be installed. Myocardial PET perfusion imaging with rubidium 82, reimbursed by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) since 1995, can be performed with a commercially available Rb-82 generator, obviating the need for a cyclotron. All metropolitan areas in

A. General Comments

The purpose of evaluating myocardial perfusion during stress testing and at rest is to determine whether there is evidence of myocardial ischemia and/or infarction in those patients suspected of having CAD, as well as to determine the extent and severity of coronary disease and any dysfunction in both patients with known coronary disease and those with suspected coronary disease. The goals of diagnosing CAD are to direct specific therapy to alleviate symptoms of ischemia, to initiate

References (100)

  • J. Krivokapich et al.

    Quantification of absolute myocardial perfusion at rest and during exercise with positron emission tomography after human cardiac transplantation

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (1991)
  • D. Pagano et al.

    Coronary artery bypass surgery as treatment for ischemic heart failure: the predictive value of viability assessment with quantitative positron emission tomography for symptomatic and functional outcome

    J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg

    (1998)
  • J.J. Bax et al.

    Improved detection of viable myocardium with fluorodeoxyglucose-labeled single-photon emission computed tomography in a patient with hibernating myocardium: comparison with rest-redistribution thallium 201-labeled single-photon emission computed tomography

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (1997)
  • N. Tamaki et al.

    Prognostic value of an increase in fluorine-18 deoxyglucose uptake in patients with myocardial infarction: comparison with stress thallium imaging

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (1993)
  • J. vom Dahl et al.

    Recovery of regional left ventricular dysfunction after coronary revascularization: impact of myocardial viability assessed by nuclear imaging and vessel patency at follow-up angiography

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (1996)
  • W.J. Flameng et al.

    PET scan predicts recovery of left ventricular function after coronary artery bypass operation

    Ann Thorac Surg

    (1997)
  • F. Haas et al.

    Preoperative positron emission tomographic viability assessment and perioperative and postoperative risk in patients with advanced ischemic heart disease

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (1997)
  • F. Fath-Ordoubadi et al.

    Coronary revascularization in the treatment of moderate and severe postischemic left ventricular dysfunction

    Am J Cardiol

    (1998)
  • J.J. Bax et al.

    Improvement of left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure symptoms and prognosis after revascularization in patients with chronic coronary artery disease and viable myocardium detected by dobutamine stress echocardiography

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (1999)
  • A.T. Willemsen et al.

    Automated ejection fraction determination from gated myocardial FDG-PET data

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (1999)
  • S.L. Bacharach et al.

    PET myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion imaging: part 1—guidelines for patient preparation and data acquisition

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (2003)
  • S.R. Bergmann

    Quantification of myocardial perfusion with positron emission tomography

  • Cardiogen-82 rubidium Rb-82

    (2000)
  • Y. Choi et al.

    A simplified method for quantification of myocardial blood flow using nitrogen-13-ammonia and dynamic PET

    J Nucl Med

    (1993)
  • J. Krivokapich et al.

    13N ammonia myocardial imaging at rest and with exercise in normal volunteersQuantification of absolute myocardial perfusion with dynamic positron emission tomography

    Circulation

    (1989)
  • M. Schwaiger et al.

    Assessment of myocardial blood flow with positron emission tomography

  • H. Schoder et al.

    Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability: noninvasive approach to cardiac pathophysiology

  • H. Shoder et al.

    Positron emission tomography for the assessment of myocardial viability

  • E. Kamel et al.

    CT vs 68GE attenuation correction in a combined PET/CT system: evaluation of the effect of lowering the CT tube current

    Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

    (2002)
  • NEMA standards publication NU 2-2001: performance measurements of positron emission tomographs

    (2001)
  • H.R. Schelbert et al.

    N-13 ammonia as an indicator of myocardial blood flow

    Circulation

    (1981)
  • Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals

    Ann ICRP

    (2000)
  • Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals

    Ann ICRP

    (1988)
  • S.H. Kim et al.

    Optimization of rubidium-82 generator performance

    Clin Nucl Med

    (2004)
  • D.J. Meerdink et al.

    Experimental studies of the physiologic properties of technetium-99m agents: myocardial transport of perfusion imaging agents

    Am J Cardiol

    (1990)
  • J.A. Leppo et al.

    Comparison of the myocardial uptake of a technetium-labeled isonitrile analogue and thallium

    Circ Res

    (1989)
  • R.E. Mack et al.

    Myocardial extraction of Rb-86 in the rabbit

    Am J Physiol

    (1959)
  • L. Becker et al.

    Comparison of Rb-86 and microsphere estimates of left ventricular blood flow distribution

    J Nucl Med

    (1977)
  • R.A. Goldstein et al.

    Myocardial perfusion with rubidium-82II. Effects of metabolic and pharmacological interventions

    J Nucl Med

    (1983)
  • H.R. Schelbert et al.

    Comparative myocardial uptake of intravenously administered radionuclides

    J Nucl Med

    (1977)
  • B.J. Chow et al.

    Feasibility of exercise rubidium-82 positron emission tomography myocardial perfusion imaging

    J Am Coll Cardiol

    (2003)
  • E.V. Garcia et al.

    Imaging guidelines for nuclear cardiology procedures: part 1

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (1996)
  • K.T. Hickey et al.

    Assessment of cardiac wall motion and ejection fraction with gated PET using N-13 ammonia

    Clin Nucl Med

    (2004)
  • K.W. Moser et al.

    Count-based attenuation maps reconstructed with a Bayesian algorithm for more efficient cardiac PET imaging [abstract]

    J Nucl Med

    (2005)
  • C. Loghin et al.

    Common artifacts in PET myocardial perfusion images due to attenuation-emission misregistration: clinical significance, causes, and solution

    J Nucl Med

    (2004)
  • B.L. Hsu et al.

    Correction of imaging artifacts from implanted leads in cardiac PET/CT: a phantom evaluation [abstract]

    J Nucl Med

    (2005)
  • K. Hamacher et al.

    Efficient sterospecific synthesis of no-carrier-added 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose using aminopolyether supported nucleophilic substitution

    J Nucl Med

    (1986)
  • ACRP-53. CDE Dosimetry Services. 2001. Available from: URL:...
  • Stabin MG, Stubbs JB, Toohey RE. Radiation dose estimates for radiopharmaceuticals. Radiation Internal Dose Information...
  • Cited by (112)

    • Prognosis and risk stratification in cardiac sarcoidosis patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction

      2020, Journal of Cardiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      We routinely checked myocardial inflammation in almost all patients with CS using any or all of imaging studies, including gallium scintigraphy, 18F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG PET), MRI, and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS). We evaluated the region of LV myocardial damage using 17-segment model based on the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology imaging guidelines [9] with 3 imaging modalities except for gallium scintigraphy. FDG PET/computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained at our institute with a Biograph Duo or a Biograph-40 PET/CT scanner (Siemens Medical Solutions, Erlangen, Germany).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text