Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 8, 2026
11:09
High-Resolution Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Small Animals
Published on: December 16, 2022
Absolute myocardial flow quantification with (82)Rb PET/CT: comparison of different software packages and methods
Abdel K Tahari1, Andy Lee, Mahadevan Rajaram
1Divisions of Nuclear Medicine, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Department of Radiology, 601 N. Caroline Street, Suite 3223, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA, atahari1@jhmi.edu.
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
|August 29, 2013
Summary
Quantitative assessment of myocardial blood flow (MBF) using rubidium-82 PET varies by software, but coronary flow reserve (CFR) is comparable across methods. Consistent software use is crucial for accurate follow-up and treatment assessment.
Area of Science:
- Nuclear Cardiology
- Cardiovascular Imaging
- Radiopharmaceutical PET Imaging
Background:
- Coronary flow reserve (CFR) assessed by rubidium-82 (82Rb) PET is a significant predictor of cardiovascular events.
- Limited data exist on how different software and estimation methods impact myocardial blood flow (MBF) and CFR quantification.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare quantitative results of MBF and CFR derived from different validated software tools using 82Rb PET.
- To evaluate the impact of software variability on cardiac PET-derived hemodynamic parameters.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 82Rb PET/CT data from 51 subjects (25 low-to-intermediate CAD probability, 26 known CAD).
- MBF and CFR were calculated at rest and stress using four software applications: Corridor4DM (factor analysis and ROI-based kinetic modeling), MunichHeart (simplified ROI-based retention model), and FlowQuant (ROI-based compartmental modeling).
Main Results:
- Significant differences were observed in resting and stress MBF values across the software tools (P<0.001).
- No statistically significant differences were found in global CFR values among the software packages (P=0.17).
- High agreement was noted for CFR values, with interobserver agreement being excellent across all software.
Conclusions:
- Quantitative MBF assessment using 82Rb PET is software-dependent.
- CFR quantification appears more robust and comparable across different software and methods.
- Consistent use of the same software and method is recommended for longitudinal patient follow-up and treatment assessment.
