Search

Background: 18F-NaF PET/CT is a novel approach to detect and quantify microcalcification in atherosclerosis. We aimed to explore the underlying systematic vascular osteogenesis in the coronary artery and aorta in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Patients with multivessel CAD prospectively underwent 18F-NaF PET/CT. The coronary microcalcification activity (CMA) and aortic microcalcification activity (AMA) were calculated based on both the volume and intensity of 18F-NaF PET activity. Peri-coronary adipose tissue (PCAT) density was measured in adipose tissue surrounding the coronary arteries and the 18F-NaF tissue-to-blood ratio (TBR) was measured in the coronary arteries. Results: 100 patients with multivessel CAD were prospectively recruited. The CMA was significantly associated with the AMA (r = 0.70; P <.001). After multivariable adjustment, the CMA was associated with the AMA (Beta = 0.445 per SD increase; P <.001). The coronary TBR was also significantly associated with the PCAT density (r = 0.56; P <.001). The PCAT density was independently associated with the coronary TBR after adjusting confounding factors. Conclusions: Coronary 18F-NaF uptake was significantly associated with the PCAT density. There was a significant relationship between the coronary and the aortic 18F-NaF uptake. It might indicate an underlying systematic vascular osteogenesis in patients with multivessel CAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To evaluate the cerebral metabolism in patients with heart failure (HF). Methods: One hundred and two HF patients were prospectively enrolled, who underwent gated 99mTc-sestamibi single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/CT, cardiac and cerebral 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/CT. Fifteen healthy volunteers served as controls. Patients were stratified by extent of hibernating myocardium (HM) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) into 4 groups where Group1: HM < 10% (n = 33); Group2: HM ≥ 10%, LVEF < 25% (n = 34); Group3: HM ≥ 10%, 25% ≤ LVEF ≤ 40% (n = 16) and Group 4: LVEF > 40% (n = 19). The standardized uptake value (SUV) in the whole brain (SUVwhole-brain) and the SUV ratios (SUVR) in 24 cognition-related brain regions were determined. SUVwhole-brain and SUVRs were compared between the 4 patient groups and the healthy controls. Results: SUVwhole-brain (r = 0.245, P = 0.013) and SUVRs in frontal areas, hippocampus, and para-hippocampus (r: 0.213 to 0.308, all P < 0.05) were correlated with HM. SUVwhole-brain differed between four patient groups and the healthy volunteers (P = 0.016) and SUVwhole-brain in Group 1 was lower than that in healthy volunteers (P < 0.05). SUVRs of Group 3 in frontal areas were the highest among four patient subgroups (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Cerebral metabolism in the whole brain was reduced but maintained in cognition-related frontal areas in HF patients with HM and moderately impaired global left ventricular function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To compare the accuracy of end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV) and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) measured by both GSPECT and GPET, using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) as a reference. Furthermore, the impacts of severe perfusion defects, akinetic/dyskinetic segments, and residual viable myocardium on the accuracy of LV functional parameters were investigated. Methods: Ninety-six consecutive patients with LV aneurysm and LV dysfunction (LVEF 32 ± 9%) diagnosed by CMR were studied with GSPECT and GPET. EDV, ESV, and LVEF were calculated using QGS software. Results: Correlations of volumes were excellent ( r 0.81-0.86) and correlation of LVEF was moderate ( r 0.65-0.76) between GSPECT vs CMR and between GPET vs CMR. Compared with CMR, ESV was overestimated by GSPECT ( P < .01) and underestimated by GPET ( P < .0001); EDV was underestimated by GPET ( P < .001); LVEF was underestimated by GSPECT but overestimated by GPET (both P < .001). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the number of segments with severe perfusion defects ( P < .001) was the only independent factor which was correlated to the EDV difference between GSPECT and CMR, the number of akinetic/dyskinetic segments with absent wall thickening (WT) was the only independent factor which was significantly correlated to the differences of ESV and LVEF measurements between GSPECT vs CMR and between GPET vs CMR ( P < .0001), respectively. Neither the mismatch score nor the segments with viable myocardium were correlated to the differences of LV volumes and LVEF measurements between different imaging modalities. Conclusions: In LV aneurysm patients, LV volumes and LVEF measured by both GSPECT and GPET imaging correlated well with those determined by CMR, but should not be interchangeable in individual patients. The accuracy of LVEF measured by GSPECT and GPET was affected by the akinetic/dyskinetic segments with absent WT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]