Abstract

BackgroundMyocardial flow reserve (MFR) assessment with cardiac positron emission computed tomography (PET/CT) is well established, and quantification relies on commercial software packages. However, for reliable use, repeatability and reproducibility are important. The aim of this study was therefore to investigate and compare between scans and software packages the repeatability and reproducibility of 82Rb-PET/CT estimated MFR. Methods and ResultsForty healthy volunteers completed two 82Rb-PET/CT rest and adenosine stress scans. syngo.MBF (Siemens), quantitative-gated SPECT (QGS) (Cedars-Sinai), and Corridor4DM (4DM) were used for analyses. Motion correction was available for 4DM. Fifty percent were men and age was 24 ± 4 years (mean ± SD). Repeatability of MFR varied between scans. syngo.MBF: mean difference (95% CI) 0.26 (− 0.03 to 0.54), P = 0.07, limits of agreement (LoA): − 1.43 to 1.95; QGS: 0.19 (− 0.08 to 0.46), P = 0.15, LoA: − 1.38 to 1.76; 4DM: 0.08 (− 0.17 to 0.34), P = 0.50, LoA: − 1.37 to 1.53; and 4DM motion corrected: 0.17 (− 0.17 to 0.51), P = 0.32, LoA: − 1.89 to 2.22. MFR was higher using 4DM +/− motion correction compared with syngo.MBF and QGS (all P < 0.0001). Concordance between syngo.MBF and QGS was high (P = 0.83). ConclusionsReproducibility of MFR varied for the different software. The highest concordance between MFRs was found between syngo.MBF and QGS.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.