“…However, SPECT has certain limitations such as relatively low spatial resolution and detection efficiency, poor sensitivity and specificity, and poor quantitative imaging capability. − Compared with SPECT, PET has advantages such as improved spatial resolution, higher sensitivity, lower tissue attenuation, and absolute quantification of myocardial blood flow (MBF). , However, the currently available myocardial PET probes such as 13 N–NH 3 ( t 1/2 = 9.97 min), 82 Rb ( t 1/2 = 1.27 min), and 15 O–H 2 O ( t 1/2 = 2.04 min) have an extremely short decay half-life, which limits the widespread clinical use because of the need for a costly cyclotron or generator . Notably, 18 F may overcome these limitations with a longer half-life (109.77 min), which allows for physical exercise stress and rest imaging. , Recently, some 18 F-labeled probes based on the lipophilic phosphine cations, for example, triphenylphosphine (TPP), have been reported. ,, They show similar properties to 99m Tc-sestamibi and 99m Tc-tetrofosmin, which specifically accumulate and remain in the mitochondria-rich myocardium. However, most of these TPP-based 18 F-probes show a high background in normal tissues and a high activity uptake in bones because of defluorination, which would affect the accurate diagnosis of myocardial abnormalities. , More importantly, reports on myocardial mitochondria-targeted lipophilic cation probes with both PET and fluorescence imaging capability are rare.…”