Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36180767›Full record

ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2023

Value of PET ECG gating in a cross-validation study of cardiac function assessment by PET/MR imaging.

Alberto Villagran Asiares, Teresa Vitadello, Borjana Bogdanovic, Esteban Lucas Solari, Lachlan McIntosh, Sylvia Schachoff, Tareq Ibrahim, Stephan G Nekolla

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Enhanced accuracy of cardiacEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Impact of ECG gating methods on the assessment of left ventricular cardiac function using PET/MRI.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Alberto Villagran AsiaresNuklearmedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. alberto.villagran@tum.de.
Teresa VitadelloKlinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin I, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Borjana BogdanovicNuklearmedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Esteban Lucas SolariNuklearmedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Lachlan McIntoshDepartment of Physical Sciences, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia.
Sylvia SchachoffNuklearmedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Tareq IbrahimKlinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin I, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Stephan G NekollaNuklearmedizinische Klinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Klinikum rechts der Isar · DETechnical University of Munich · DEGerman Centre for Cardiovascular Research · DEPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis work investigated the impact of different cardiac gating methods on the assessment of cardiac function by FDG-PET in a cross-validation PET/MR study. METHODS AND

resultsMR- and PET-based left ventricular end-diastolic, end-systolic volumes, and ejection fraction (EDV, ESV, and EF) were delineated in 30 patients with a PET/MR examination. Cardiac PET imaging was performed using three ECG gating methods: fixed number of gates per beat (STD), STD with a beat acceptance window (STD-BR), and fixed gate duration (FW). High MR-PET correlations were found in all the values. ESVs correlated better than EDVs and EFs: Pearson's r coefficient [0.92, 0.92, 0.92] in ESV vs [0.75, 0.81, 0.80] in EDV and [0.79, 0.91, 0.87] in EF, for each method [STD, STD-BR, FW]. Biases with respect to MRI for all the evaluated PET methods were less than 13% in EDV, 5% in ESV, and 14% in EF, but with wide limits of agreements, in the range (59-68)% in EDV, (65-70)% in ESV, and (49-71)% in EF. STD showed the strongest disagreement, while there were no marked differences between STD-BR and FW.

conclusionBased on these findings, PET- and MR-based cardiac function parameters were highly correlated but in substantial disagreement with variabilities introduced by the selected PET ECG gating method. The most significant differences were associated with the ECG gating method susceptible to highly irregular beats, while similar performance was observed in the methods using uniform adjustment of gates width per beat with the beat acceptance window, and fixed gate width along all the beats. Thus, strict quality controls of R peak detection are needed to minimize its impact on the function assessment.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyElectrocardiographyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsStroke VolumeVentricular Function, Leftdiagnostic and prognostic applicationhybrid imagingimage analysisMRIPETviability

Identifiers

PMID36180767
PMCPMC10261229
OpenAlexW4298124964

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.