Journal of Nuclear Cardiology

, Volume 25, Issue 6, pp 2168–2171 | Cite as

Selection of abstracts from the scientific sessions of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Philadelphia PA June 23–26, 2018

  • Jacek Kwiecinski
  • Yoon Jae Lee
  • Piotr SlomkaEmail author


This mini-review highlights cardiovascular studies that were presented during the 2018 Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (SNMMI) annual meeting in Philadelphia. The aim of this review is to inform readers about several noteworthy studies reported at the meeting. Although cardiovascular application of PET and SPECT are not the primary focus of the SNMMI, several scientific teams working in this field presented their latest scientific findings at this meeting. The review therefore aims to inform the readers who did not attend the SNMMI annual meeting about some interesting new concepts presented this year at the conference.


PET SPECT nuclear cardiology cardiovascular imaging 



Anderson–Fabry disease


Deep learning




18F fluorodeoxyglucose


18F-18 sodium fluoride


Left ventricle


Major adverse cardiovascular events


Myocardial blood flow


Myocardial infarction


Myocardial perfusion imaging


Magnetic resonance imaging


Positron emission tomography


Perfusable tissue fraction


Single-photon emission computed tomography


Total perfusion deficit



Piotr Slomka receives software royalties for Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS) software from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. The other authors have nothing to disclose.


  1. 1.
    AlJaroudi WA, Lloyd SG, Chaudhry FA, Hage FG. Multi-modality imaging: bird’s eye view from the 2016 American Heart Association Scientific Sessions. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:946-51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bax JJ, Delgado V, Plein S, Knuuti J, Achenbach S. Multimodality imaging: bird’s eye view from The European Society of Cardiology Congress 2017, Barcelona, August 26–30, 2017. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:336-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lloyd S, Blankstein R, Van Decker WA, Garcia M. Multimodality imaging: bird’s eye view from The American College of Cardiology Annual Scientific Meeting 2017, Washington DC March 17–19, 2017. J Nucl Cardiol 2018;25:331-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Namavari M, Gowrishankar G, Srinivasan A, Gambhir SS, Haywood T, Beinat C. A novel synthesis of 6″-[(18) F]-fluoromaltotriose as a PET tracer for imaging bacterial infection. J Labelled Comp Radiopharm 2018;61:408-14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bengel FM, Ross TL. Emerging imaging targets for infiltrative cardiomyopathy: inflammation and fibrosis. J Nucl Cardiol 2018. Scholar
  6. 6.
    Reiter T, Kircher M, Schirbel A, et al Imaging of C-X-C motif chemokine receptor CXCR4 expression after myocardial infarction with [(68)Ga]Pentixafor-PET/CT in correlation with cardiac MRI. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thackeray JT, Derlin T, Haghikia A, et al Molecular imaging of the chemokine receptor CXCR4 after acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2015;8:1417-26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joshi NV, Vesey AT, Williams MC, et al 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography for identification of ruptured and high-risk coronary atherosclerotic plaques: a prospective clinical trial. Lancet 2014;383:705-13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vesey AT, Jenkins WS, Irkle A, et al (18)F-Fluoride and (18)F-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography after transient ischemic attack or minor ischemic stroke: case–control study. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2017;10:e004976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sado DM, White SK, Piechnik SK, et al Identification and assessment of Anderson–Fabry disease by cardiovascular magnetic resonance noncontrast myocardial T1 mapping. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:392-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yu Y, Chan C, Ma T, et al Event-by-event continuous respiratory motion correction for dynamic PET imaging. J Nucl Med 2016;57:1084-90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaster T, Mylonas I, Renaud JM, Wells GA, Beanlands RS, deKemp RA. Accuracy of low-dose rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion imaging for detection of coronary artery disease using 3D PET and normal database interpretation. J Nucl Cardiol 2012;19:1135-45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moody JB, Hiller KM, Lee BC, Corbett JR, Ficaro EP, Murthy VL. Limitations of Rb-82 weight-adjusted dosing accuracy at low doses. J Nucl Cardiol 2017;24:1395-401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nappi C, Cuocolo A. The machine learning approach: artificial intelligence is coming to support critical clinical thinking. J Nucl Cardiol 2018. Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson KW, Torres Soto J, Glicksberg BS, et al Artificial intelligence in cardiology. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018;71:2668-79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Slomka PJ, Nishina H, Berman DS, et al Automated quantification of myocardial perfusion SPECT using simplified normal limits. J Nucl Cardiol 2005;12:66-77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Slomka PJ, Betancur J, Liang JX, et al Rationale and design of the REgistry of fast myocardial perfusion imaging with NExt generation SPECT (REFINE SPECT). J Nucl Cardiol 2018. Scholar
  18. 18.
    Betancur J, Commandeur F, Motlagh M, et al Deep learning for prediction of obstructive disease from fast myocardial perfusion SPECT: a multicenter study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2018. Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Nuclear Cardiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jacek Kwiecinski
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yoon Jae Lee
    • 1
  • Piotr Slomka
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Artificial Intelligence in Medicine ProgramCedars-Sinai Medical CenterLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.BHF Centre for Cardiovascular ScienceUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations