ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology
Assessment of myocardial perfusion by dynamic O-15-labeled water PET imaging: validation of a new fast factor analysis.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb positron emission tomography: clinical validation with 15O-water.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2012Trial
- SimultaneousEuropean journal of hybrid imaging · 2019Article
- 15-O-water myocardial flow reserve PET and CT angiography by full hybrid PET/CT as a potential alternative to invasive angiography.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2018Article
- Multimodality quantitative assessments of myocardial perfusion using dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance andIEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2018Article
- SPECT and PET imaging of angiogenesis and arteriogenesis in pre-clinical models of myocardial ischemia and peripheral vascular disease.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2016Review
- Advanced tracers in PET imaging of cardiovascular disease.BioMed research international · 2014Review
- Intra- and inter-operator repeatability of myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow reserve measurements using rubidium-82 pet and a highly automated analysis program.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2010Article
- Coronary calcium score scans for attenuation correction of quantitative PET/CT 13N-ammonia myocardial perfusion imaging.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFactor analysis (FA) is an established method for separating myocardium from blood pool by use of oxygen 15-labeled water and positron emission tomography for analyzing myocardial blood flow (MBF). Conventional FA methods generating images from sinograms (sinoFA) are time-consuming, whereas FA can be performed on the reconstructed images (reconFA) in a fraction of time. We validated the MBF values obtained by reconFA versus sinoFA. METHODS AND
resultsIn 23 volunteers (mean age, 26.6 +/- 3.4 years) MBF was calculated from sinoFA and reconFA and blindly reanalyzed 1 month later by the same observer. Intraobserver agreement and reconFA-versus-sinoFA agreement were assessed according to Bland and Altman (BA). Reproducibility proved excellent for global sinoFA (r = 0.968; P < .001; BA limits, -0.617 to 0.676 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)) and slightly superior for reconFA (r = 0.979; P < .001; BA limits, -0.538 to 0.558 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)), with wider limits of agreement for segmental MBF from sinoFA (r = 0.777; P < .001; BA limits, -1.676 to 1.656 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)) and reconFA (r = 0.844; P < .001; BA limits, -1.999 to 1.992 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)). In addition, sinoFA and reconFA showed excellent correlation (r = 0.975, P < .001) and agreement (BA limits, -0.528 to 0.648 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)) for global and segmental values (r = 0.955; P < .001; BA limits, -1.371 to 1.491 mL x min(-1) x g(-1)).
conclusionsUse of reconFA allows rapid and reliable quantitative MBF assessment with O-15-labeled water.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17826323What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.