Quantification of myocardial perfusion reserve by CZT-SPECT: A head to head comparison with 82Rubidium PET imaging

SPECT quantification of myocardial blood flow: Another step toward widespread availability

“…Several groups have reported their experience using SPECT for MBF quantification, [4][5][6] including a handful studies that have compared MBF results head-to-head between SPECT and PET in the same population (Table 2). [7][8][9][10][11] In their recent manuscript ''Quantification of myocardial perfusion reserve with CZT-SPECT: comparisons with rubidium PET,'' Acampa et al compare the performance of D-SPECT with rubidium-82 PET. 11 They report that MBF and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) measured by CZT-SPECT correlate moderately well compared to PET (Pearson correlation * 0.5) in 25 patients referred for clinical evaluation.…”

“…[7][8][9][10][11] In their recent manuscript ''Quantification of myocardial perfusion reserve with CZT-SPECT: comparisons with rubidium PET,'' Acampa et al compare the performance of D-SPECT with rubidium-82 PET. 11 They report that MBF and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) measured by CZT-SPECT correlate moderately well compared to PET (Pearson correlation * 0.5) in 25 patients referred for clinical evaluation. They show that CZT-SPECT performance is comparable to PET with an Area Under ROC Curve (AUC) of 0.83 and 0.84, respectively.…”

Vasodilators and myocardial blood flow by CZT cameras: Make us see further

“…Several studies have shown that quantification of MBF and MPR values assessed by CZT-SPECT imaging are comparable to PET. 14,15 However, no data are available about the effects on myocardial hyperemia of different vasodilators by CZT-SPECT. In the current issue of the Journal, Brama et al compared retrospectively MBF and MPR values by using CZT-SPECT, using regadenoson in 66 patients and dipyridamole in 162 patients.…”

Cardiac PET imaging: Lost in quantification. It’s time to find the way

“…In addition to the high number of available quantification tools, it should be considered the emerging role of CZT cameras in dynamic cardiac imaging. [19][20][21] In the latest years, research focused on these new CZT-SPECT and the opportunity of performing absolute quantification of MBF and MPR even in those nuclear medicine laboratories without PET equipment. [19][20][21] The risk is to be submerged by a large amount of different values produced by different systems, different tracers, different software, without being able to give each of these a single meaning.…”

“…[19][20][21] In the latest years, research focused on these new CZT-SPECT and the opportunity of performing absolute quantification of MBF and MPR even in those nuclear medicine laboratories without PET equipment. [19][20][21] The risk is to be submerged by a large amount of different values produced by different systems, different tracers, different software, without being able to give each of these a single meaning. We would wonder if cardiac imaging really needs further quantitative tools or to optimize available resources, whereas the goal must be to obtain the best option that takes into account the different types of scanner, tracers, and protocols.…”