TY - JOUR
T1 - 18F-FDG PET in Myocardial Viability Assessment
T2 - A Practical and Time-Efficient Protocol
AU - Mhlanga, Joyce
AU - Derenoncourt, Paul
AU - Haq, Adeel
AU - Bhandiwad, Anita
AU - Laforest, Richard
AU - Siegel, Barry A.
AU - Dehdashti, Farrokh
AU - Gropler, Robert J.
AU - Schindler, Thomas H.
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by a depart mental fund from Washington University. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Publisher Copyright:
COPYRIGHT © 2022 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.
PY - 2022/4/1
Y1 - 2022/4/1
N2 - We assessed image quality using a practical and time-efficient protocol for intravenous glucose loading and insulin injection before administration of 18F-FDG for PET myocardial viability evaluation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: The metabolic preparation period (MPP) or optimal cardiac 18F-FDG uptake was determined from the time of intravenous infusion of 12.5 or 25 g of 50% dextrose to the time of 18F-FDG injection. Cardiac 18F-FDG image quality was evaluated according to a 5-point scoring system (from 5, excellent, to 1, nondiagnostic) by 2 independent observers. In cases of disagreement, consensus was achieved in a joint reading. Fifteen patients with ICM who underwent oral glucose loading and intravenous insulin administration served as a reference for MPP comparisons. Results: Fifty-nine consecutive patients (age, 63 6 10 y; 48 men and 11 women) underwent rest 99mTc-tetrofosmin SPECT/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for the evaluation of myocardial viability. 18F-FDG image quality was scored as excellent in 42%, very good in 36%, good in 17%, fair in 3%, and nondiagnostic in 2%. When diabetic and nondiabetic patients were compared, the quality scores were excellent in 29% versus 76%, very good in 41% versus 18%, good in 24% versus 6%, fair in 4% versus 0%, and nondiagnostic in 2% versus 0%. The mean (6SD) quality score was 4.12 6 0.95, and overall it was better in nondiabetic than in diabetic patients (4.71 6 0.59 vs. 3.88 6 0.96; P, 0.0001). Notably, the average MPP was significantly less with intravenous glucose loading than with oral glucose loading (51 6 15 min vs. 132 6 29 min; P, 0.0001), paralleled by higher insulin doses (6.3 6 2.2 U vs. 2.0 6 1.69 U; P, 0.001). Conclusion: Using a practical and time-efficient protocol for intravenous glucose loading and insulin administration before 18F-FDG injection reduces the MPP by 61% as compared with an oral glucose challenge and affords good-to-excellent image quality in 95% of ICM patients.
AB - We assessed image quality using a practical and time-efficient protocol for intravenous glucose loading and insulin injection before administration of 18F-FDG for PET myocardial viability evaluation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM), with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: The metabolic preparation period (MPP) or optimal cardiac 18F-FDG uptake was determined from the time of intravenous infusion of 12.5 or 25 g of 50% dextrose to the time of 18F-FDG injection. Cardiac 18F-FDG image quality was evaluated according to a 5-point scoring system (from 5, excellent, to 1, nondiagnostic) by 2 independent observers. In cases of disagreement, consensus was achieved in a joint reading. Fifteen patients with ICM who underwent oral glucose loading and intravenous insulin administration served as a reference for MPP comparisons. Results: Fifty-nine consecutive patients (age, 63 6 10 y; 48 men and 11 women) underwent rest 99mTc-tetrofosmin SPECT/CT and 18F-FDG PET/CT for the evaluation of myocardial viability. 18F-FDG image quality was scored as excellent in 42%, very good in 36%, good in 17%, fair in 3%, and nondiagnostic in 2%. When diabetic and nondiabetic patients were compared, the quality scores were excellent in 29% versus 76%, very good in 41% versus 18%, good in 24% versus 6%, fair in 4% versus 0%, and nondiagnostic in 2% versus 0%. The mean (6SD) quality score was 4.12 6 0.95, and overall it was better in nondiabetic than in diabetic patients (4.71 6 0.59 vs. 3.88 6 0.96; P, 0.0001). Notably, the average MPP was significantly less with intravenous glucose loading than with oral glucose loading (51 6 15 min vs. 132 6 29 min; P, 0.0001), paralleled by higher insulin doses (6.3 6 2.2 U vs. 2.0 6 1.69 U; P, 0.001). Conclusion: Using a practical and time-efficient protocol for intravenous glucose loading and insulin administration before 18F-FDG injection reduces the MPP by 61% as compared with an oral glucose challenge and affords good-to-excellent image quality in 95% of ICM patients.
KW - Coronary artery disease
KW - F-FDG
KW - Hibernation
KW - Myocardial perfusion
KW - Myocardial viability
KW - PET
KW - SPECT
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128114562&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2967/jnumed.121.262432
DO - 10.2967/jnumed.121.262432
M3 - Article
C2 - 34503961
AN - SCOPUS:85128114562
SN - 0161-5505
VL - 63
SP - 602
EP - 608
JO - Journal of Nuclear Medicine
JF - Journal of Nuclear Medicine
IS - 4
ER -