Cardiac 82rubidium PET/CT: initial European experience
Myocardial perfusion with PET/CT has advantages over conventional SPECT. We describe our initial European experience using 82Rubidium-PET/CT, as part of a clinical myocardial perfusion service.
We studied the first 100 patients (64 male; 36 female, mean age = 60: SD +/−12.5y, mean body mass index = 30: SD +/−6.9kg/m 2 ) who underwent 82Rubidium cardiac PET/CT in our institution. Thirty patients had recently undergone coronary angiography. Patients underwent imaging during adenosine infusion and at rest. Images were acquired over 5 minutes using a GE-PET/CT instrument. Image quality was described as good, adequate or inadequate. Images were reported patient-by-patient by a minimum of five nuclear medicine physicians. A segment-by-segment analysis (17-segment model) was also performed.
Image quality was good in 77%, adequate 23% and inadequate 0%. There was no statistical difference in image quality between obese and non-obese patients (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.2864). 59% had normal perfusion studies, 29% had inducible ischaemia, 12% had myocardial infarction (11% with super added ischaemia). There was reduced 82Rubidium uptake in 132/1700 segments during stress. There was reduced 82Rubidium uptake at rest in 42/1700 segments. The 82Rubidium PET/CT findings were consistent with the angiographic findings in 28/30 cases.
We show that, even from initial use of 82Rubidium, it is possible to perform myocardial perfusion studies quickly with good image quality, even in the obese. The PET findings correlated well in the third of the cases where angiography was available. As such, 82Rubidium cardiac PET/CT is likely to be an exciting addition to the European nuclear physician/ cardiologist’s radionuclide imaging arsenal.
KeywordsCardiac PET Cardiology Perfusion
This work was undertaken at UCLH/UCL, who received a proportion of funding from the UK Department of Health’s NIHR Biomedical Research Centres funding scheme.
We would also like to thank Dr Carolyn Corn (Oklahoma Heart Hospital), Mrs Caroline Townsend, Mrs Heidi Batchelor, and Prof Brian Hutton (UCL/UCLH) for their contribution to the work.
- 5.Gould KL, Goldstein RA, Mullani NA, Kirkeeide RL, Wong WH, Tewson TJ, et al. Noninvasive assessment of coronary stenoses by myocardial perfusion imaging during pharmacologic coronary vasodilation. VIII. Clinical feasibility of positron cardiac imaging without a cyclotron using generator-produced rubidium-82. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;7:775–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Cerqueira MD, Weissman NJ, Dilsizian V, Jacobs AK, Kaul S, Laskey WK, et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac imaging committee of the council on clinical cardiology of the American heart association. Circulation 2002;105:539–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Brown KA, Heller GV, Landin RS, Shaw LJ, Beller GA, Pasquale MJ, et al. Early dipyridamole (99m)Tc-sestamibi single photon emission computed tomographic imaging 2 to 4 days after acute myocardial infarction predicts in-hospital and postdischarge cardiac events. Circulation 1999;100:2060–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Stabin MG, Stubbs JB, Toohey RE. Radiation dose estimates for radiopharmaceuticals-NUREG/CR-6345. Oak Ridge Institute of Science and Education, Oak Ridge, Tennessee; 1996.Google Scholar
- 9.International Commission on Radiological Protection (1998) Radiation Dose to Patients from radiopharmaceuticals publication 80. Addendum 2 to IRCP 53. Also includes Addendum 1 to IRCP Publication 72. Ann ICRP 28(3):116.Google Scholar
- 11.Administration of Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee. Notes for guidance on clinical administration of radiopharmaceuticals and use of sealed sources. Chilton, UK: National Radiological Protection Board; 2006;36.Google Scholar