ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
Virtual myocardial blood flow and flow reserve from static PET imaging using artificial intelligence.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Quantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) provide incremental diagnostic and prognostic value in cardiac PET, but their widespread use is limited by the technical demands of dynamic imaging protocols. We evaluated the feasibility of using artificial intelligence (AI) to predict MBF and MFR from static and gated PET images, without the need for dynamic acquisition. Methods: A machine learning (XGBoost) model was trained on 82Rb PET multi-center dataset using static perfusion imaging, injected dose, hemodynamic measures, clinical data and CT-derived features (including body composition) from the hybrid CT attenuation scan. Model performance was evaluated externally in an independent cohort. Results: In total, 10,566 (derivation-cohort) and 7,842 (external-cohort) patients were included in this multi-center study. On the external-cohort, AI approach achieved an Area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (0.92-0.93) for abnormal stress MBF and 0.91 (0.90-0.92) for abnormal MFR; Intra-class correlation (ICC) 0.80 (0.78-0.82) and 0.78 (0.76-0.79), respectively. AI MFR closely mirrored the prognostic performance of measured MFR, showing nearly identical Kaplan-Meier risk stratification (both p<0.0001) and maintaining strong, and independently significant associations with all-cause mortality (HR 3.4 [2.8-4.2] vs. 4.6 [3.6-5.8]; both p<0.001), and demonstrated similar added value to perfusion for mortality prediction. Conclusion: AI-predicted virtual stress MBF and MFR assessment using static and gated PET data is feasible and generalizable across cohorts. By removing the dependency on dynamic acquisitions, this approach has the potential to broaden the clinical adoption of flow quantification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.