Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21519976›Full record

ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2011

Feasibility of subendocardial and subepicardial myocardial perfusion measurements in healthy normals with (15)O-labeled water and positron emission tomography.

Ilse A Vermeltfoort, Pieter G Raijmakers, Mark Lubberink, Tjeerd Germans, Albert C van Rossum, Adriaan A Lammertsma, Paul Knaapen

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Subendocardial quantification enhances coronary artery disease detection inEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2025
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. The Updated Registry of Fast Myocardial Perfusion Imaging with Next-Generation SPECT (REFINE SPECT 2.0).Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2024
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Review
  9. Sub-endocardial and sub-epicardial measurement of myocardial blood flow usingJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020
    Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Coronary Microcirculation in Aortic Stenosis.Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2019
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. New frontiers for cardiac PET: looking beyond mean transmural myocardial quantification.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2015
    Article
  17. Article
  18. The myocardial oxygen supply:demand index revisited.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2014
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Quantitative myocardial perfusion imaging by cardiovascular magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2013
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Ilse A VermeltfoortDepartment of Nuclear Medicine & PET Research, VU University Medical Centre, de Boelelaan 1117, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. i.vermeltfoort@vumc.nl
Pieter G Raijmakers
Mark Lubberink
Tjeerd Germans
Albert C van Rossum
Adriaan A Lammertsma
Paul Knaapen
Amsterdam UMC Location VUmc · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) enables robust and reproducible measurements of myocardial blood flow (MBF). However, the relatively limited resolution of PET till recently prohibited distinction between the subendocardial and the subepicardial layers in non-hypertrophied myocardium. Recent developments in hard- and software, however, have enabled to identify a transmural gradient difference in animal experiments. The aim of this study is to determine the feasibility of subendocardial and subepicardial MBF in normal human hearts assessed with (15)O-labeled water PET.

methodsTwenty-seven healthy subjects (mean age 41 ± 13 years; 11 men) were studied with (15)O-labeled water PET to quantify resting and hyperaemic (adenosine) MBF at a subendocardial and subepicardial level. In addition, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed to determine left ventricular (LV) volumes and function.

resultsMean rest MBF was 1.46 ± 0.49 in the subendocardium, and 1.14 ± 0.342 mL · min(-1) · g(-1) in the subepicardium (P < .001). MBF during vasodilation was augmented to a greater extent at the subepicardial level (subendocardium vs subepicardium: 3.88 ± 0.86 vs 4.14 ± 0.88 mL · min(-1) · g(-1), P = .013). The endocardial-to-epicardial MBF ratio decreased significantly during hyperaemia (1.35 ± 0.23 to 1.12 ± 0.20, P < .001). Hyperaemic transmural MBF was inversely correlated with left ventricular end-diastolic volume index (LVEDVI) (r (2) = 0.41, P = .0003), with greater impact however at the subendocardial level.

conclusions(15)O-labeled water PET enables MBF measurements with distinction of the subendocardial and subepicardial layers in the normal human heart and correlates with LVEDVI. This PET technique may prove useful in evaluating patients with signs of ischaemia due to coronary artery disease or microvascular dysfunction.

Indexed as

Coronary CirculationOxygen RadioisotopesWaterAdultEndocardiumFeasibility StudiesFemaleHemodynamicsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPericardiumPositron-Emission TomographyOxygen RadioisotopesWater

Identifiers

PMID21519976
PMCPMC3143328
OpenAlexW2169973865

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.