A review on cardiac positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of cardivascular diseases_Journal of Biomedical Engineering

Authors：

CHEN Haotian , WANG Rang , WEI Jing ,  FAN Chengzhong

Department of Nuclear Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China;

Corresponding author：

Keywords：

cardiac positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging; cardiovascular diseases; fusion imaging; positron emission tomography; magnetic resonance imaging

DOI：

10.7507/1001-5515.201812033

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

There are various examination methods for cardiovascular diseases. Non-invasive diagnosis and prognostic information acquisition are the current research hotspots of related imaging examinations. Positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a new advanced fusion imaging technology that combines the molecular imaging of PET with the soft tissue contrast function of MRI to achieve their complementary advantages. This article briefly introduces several major aspects of cardiac PET/MRI in the diagnosis of cardiovascular disease, including atherosclerosis, ischemic cardiomyopathy, nodular heart disease, and myocardial amyloidosis, in order to promote cardiac PET/MRI to be more widely used in precision medicine in this field.

Citation： CHEN Haotian, WANG Rang, WEI Jing, FAN Chengzhong. A review on cardiac positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of cardivascular diseases. Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2020, 37(5): 897-902. doi: 10.7507/1001-5515.201812033 Copy

1.	郭晋纲, 徐树明, 郑永明, 等. 一体化同步扫描 TOF-PET/MR 分子影像设备的进展. 中国医疗器械杂志, 2016, 40(4): 267-270, 274.
2.	Musafargani S, Ghosh K K, Mishra S, et al. PET/MRI: a frontier in era of complementary hybrid imaging. Eur J Hybrid Imaging, 2018, 2(1): 12.
3.	董硕, 李东, 吴天棋, 等. 一体化 PET-MR 设备中飞行时间技术和点扩展函数技术对PET图像质量的影响. 中国医学装备, 2018, 15(2): 1-5.
4.	毕晓, 刘家金, 关志伟, 等. 基于磁共振成像 Dixon 序列和 CT 的衰减校正方法在心脏 PET 中的应用比较. 中国医学装备, 2019, 16(6): 33-37.
5.	Lassen M L, Rasul S, Beitzke D, et al. Assessment of attenuation correction for myocardial PET imaging using combined PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019, 26(4): 1107-1118.
6.	Grant A M, Deller T W, Khalighi M M, et al. NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system. Med Phys, 2016, 43(5): 2334.
7.	Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B, et al. Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med, 2011, 52(12): 1914-1922.
8.	Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system. Phys Med Biol, 2011, 56(10): 3091-3106.
9.	Hyafil F, Vigne J. Imaging inflammation in atherosclerotic plaques: just make it easy!. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019, 26(5): 1705-1708.
10.	Mckenney-Drake M L, Territo P R, Salavati A, et al. (18)F-NaF PET imaging of early coronary artery calcification. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2016, 9(5): 627-628.
11.	Saraste A, Laitinen I, Weidl E, et al. Diet intervention reduces uptake of αvβ3 integrin-targeted PET tracer 18F-galacto-RGD in mouse atherosclerotic plaques. J Nucl Cardiol, 2012, 19(4): 775-784.
12.	Xie Y, Jin Hang, Zeng Mengsu, et al. Coronary artery plaque imaging. Curr Atheroscler Rep, 2017, 19(9): 37.
13.	Robson P M, Dweck M R, Trivieri M G, et al. Coronary artery PET/Mr imaging: feasibility, limitations, and solutions. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 10(10 Pt A): 1103-1112.
14.	Fernández-Friera L, Fuster V, López-Melgar B, et al. Vascular inflammation in subclinical atherosclerosis detected by hybrid PET/MRI. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2019, 73(12): 1371-1382.
15.	Catalano O, Moro G, Mori A, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance in stable coronary artery disease: added prognostic value to conventional risk profiling. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018: 2806148.
16.	Lipinski M J, Mcvey C M, Berger J S, et al. Prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2013, 62(9): 826-838.
17.	Vincenti G, Masci P G, Monney P, et al. Stress perfusion CMR in patients with known and suspected CAD: prognostic value and optimal ischemic threshold for revascularization. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 10(5): 526-537.
18.	Naßenstein K, Nensa F, Schlosser T, et al. Cardiac MRI: T2-mapping versus T2-weighted dark-blood TSE imaging for myocardial edema visualization in acute myocardial infarction. Rofo, 2014, 186(2): 166-172.
19.	Kero T, Johansson E, Engström M, et al. Evaluation of quantitative CMR perfusion imaging by comparison with simultaneous ¹⁵O-water-PET. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-019-01810-z.
20.	Hung G U, Ko K Y, LIN Cl, et al. Impact of initial myocardial perfusion imaging versus invasive coronary angiography on outcomes in coronary artery disease: a nationwide cohort study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2018, 45(4): 567-574.
21.	Driessen R S, Raijmakers P G, Stuijfzand W J, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging with PET. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 33(7): 1021-1031.
22.	Sadeghi M M. 2018 SNMMI highlights lecture: cardiovascular nuclear and molecular imaging. J Nucl Med, 2018, 59(9): 9N-15N.
23.	Valenta I, Quercioli A, Schindler T H. Diagnostic value of PET-measured longitudinal flow gradient for the identification of coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2014, 7(4): 387-396.
24.	Khalaf S, Chamsi-Pasha M, Al-Mallah M H. Assessment of myocardial viability by PET. Curr Opin Cardiol, 2019, 34(5): 466-472.
25.	Rischpler C, Langwieser N, Souvatzoglou M, et al. PET/MRI early after myocardial infarction: evaluation of viability with late Gadolinium enhancement transmurality vs. 18F-FDG uptake. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2015, 16(6): 661-669.
26.	Beitzke D, Rasul S, Lassen M L, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in ischemic heart disease by PET/MRI: comparison of left ventricular perfusion, hibernation, and scar burden. Acad Radiol, 2020, 27(2): 188-197.
27.	Kunze K P, Nekolla S G, Rischpler C, et al. Myocardial perfusion quantification using simultaneously acquired 13 NH₃-ammonia PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in patients at rest and stress. Magn Reson Med, 2018, 80(6): 2641-2654.
28.	Masuda A, Nemoto A, Yamaki T, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability of a patient with old myocardial infarction by (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(4): 1423-1426.
29.	Chareonthaitawee P, Beanlands R S, Chen W, et al. Joint SNMMI-ASNC expert consensus document on the role of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in cardiac sarcoid detection and therapy monitoring. J Nucl Med, 2017, 58(8): 1341-1353.
30.	Lebasnier A, Legallois D, Bienvenu B, et al. Diagnostic value of quantitative assessment of cardiac (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose uptake in suspected cardiac sarcoidosis. Ann Nucl Med, 2018, 32(5): 319-327.
31.	Vita T, Okada D R, Veillet-Chowdhury M, et al. Complementary value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the assessment of cardiac sarcoidosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, 2018, 11(1): e007030.
32.	Wada K, Niitsuma T, Yamaki T, et al. Simultaneous cardiac imaging to detect inflammation and scar tissue with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI in cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2016, 23(5): 1180-1182.
33.	Dweck M R, Abgral R, Trivieri M G, et al. Hybrid magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose to diagnose active cardiac sarcoidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2018, 11(1): 94-107.
34.	Birnie D H, Nery P B, Ha A C, et al. Cardiac Sarcoidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2016, 68(4): 411-421.
35.	Wisenberg G, Thiessen J D, Pavlovsky W, et al. Same day comparison of PET/CT and PET/MR in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019.
36.	Gormsen L C, Haraldsen A, Kramer S, et al. A dual tracer (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT pilot study for detection of cardiac sarcoidosis. EJNMMI Res, 2016, 6(1): 52.
37.	Raina S, Lensing S Y, Nairooz R S, et al. Prognostic value of late Gadolinium enhancement CMR in systemic amyloidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2016, 9(11): 1267-1277.
38.	Lee S P, Lee E S, Choi H, et al. 11C-Pittsburgh B PET imaging in cardiac amyloidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2015, 8(1): 50-59.
39.	Pilebro B, Arvidsson S, Lindqvist P, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) utilizing Pittsburgh compound B (PIB) for detection of amyloid heart deposits in hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR). J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(1): 240-248.
40.	Trivieri M G, Dweck M R, Abgral R, et al. 18F-Sodium fluoride PET/MR for the assessment of cardiac amyloidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2016, 68(24): 2712-2714.
41.	Abulizi M, Sifaoui I, Wuliya-Gariepy M, et al. (18)F-sodium fluoride PET/MRI myocardial imaging in patients with suspected cardiac amyloidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019.
42.	Nensa F, Kloth J, Tezgah E, et al. Feasibility of FDG-PET in myocarditis: comparison to CMR using integrated PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(3): 785-794.

1. 郭晋纲, 徐树明, 郑永明, 等. 一体化同步扫描 TOF-PET/MR 分子影像设备的进展. 中国医疗器械杂志, 2016, 40(4): 267-270, 274.
2. Musafargani S, Ghosh K K, Mishra S, et al. PET/MRI: a frontier in era of complementary hybrid imaging. Eur J Hybrid Imaging, 2018, 2(1): 12.
3. 董硕, 李东, 吴天棋, 等. 一体化 PET-MR 设备中飞行时间技术和点扩展函数技术对PET图像质量的影响. 中国医学装备, 2018, 15(2): 1-5.
4. 毕晓, 刘家金, 关志伟, 等. 基于磁共振成像 Dixon 序列和 CT 的衰减校正方法在心脏 PET 中的应用比较. 中国医学装备, 2019, 16(6): 33-37.
5. Lassen M L, Rasul S, Beitzke D, et al. Assessment of attenuation correction for myocardial PET imaging using combined PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019, 26(4): 1107-1118.
6. Grant A M, Deller T W, Khalighi M M, et al. NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system. Med Phys, 2016, 43(5): 2334.
7. Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B, et al. Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med, 2011, 52(12): 1914-1922.
8. Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system. Phys Med Biol, 2011, 56(10): 3091-3106.
9. Hyafil F, Vigne J. Imaging inflammation in atherosclerotic plaques: just make it easy!. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019, 26(5): 1705-1708.
10. Mckenney-Drake M L, Territo P R, Salavati A, et al. (18)F-NaF PET imaging of early coronary artery calcification. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2016, 9(5): 627-628.
11. Saraste A, Laitinen I, Weidl E, et al. Diet intervention reduces uptake of αvβ3 integrin-targeted PET tracer 18F-galacto-RGD in mouse atherosclerotic plaques. J Nucl Cardiol, 2012, 19(4): 775-784.
12. Xie Y, Jin Hang, Zeng Mengsu, et al. Coronary artery plaque imaging. Curr Atheroscler Rep, 2017, 19(9): 37.
13. Robson P M, Dweck M R, Trivieri M G, et al. Coronary artery PET/Mr imaging: feasibility, limitations, and solutions. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 10(10 Pt A): 1103-1112.
14. Fernández-Friera L, Fuster V, López-Melgar B, et al. Vascular inflammation in subclinical atherosclerosis detected by hybrid PET/MRI. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2019, 73(12): 1371-1382.
15. Catalano O, Moro G, Mori A, et al. Cardiac magnetic resonance in stable coronary artery disease: added prognostic value to conventional risk profiling. Biomed Res Int, 2018, 2018: 2806148.
16. Lipinski M J, Mcvey C M, Berger J S, et al. Prognostic value of stress cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2013, 62(9): 826-838.
17. Vincenti G, Masci P G, Monney P, et al. Stress perfusion CMR in patients with known and suspected CAD: prognostic value and optimal ischemic threshold for revascularization. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 10(5): 526-537.
18. Naßenstein K, Nensa F, Schlosser T, et al. Cardiac MRI: T2-mapping versus T2-weighted dark-blood TSE imaging for myocardial edema visualization in acute myocardial infarction. Rofo, 2014, 186(2): 166-172.
19. Kero T, Johansson E, Engström M, et al. Evaluation of quantitative CMR perfusion imaging by comparison with simultaneous ¹⁵O-water-PET. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-019-01810-z.
20. Hung G U, Ko K Y, LIN Cl, et al. Impact of initial myocardial perfusion imaging versus invasive coronary angiography on outcomes in coronary artery disease: a nationwide cohort study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2018, 45(4): 567-574.
21. Driessen R S, Raijmakers P G, Stuijfzand W J, et al. Myocardial perfusion imaging with PET. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2017, 33(7): 1021-1031.
22. Sadeghi M M. 2018 SNMMI highlights lecture: cardiovascular nuclear and molecular imaging. J Nucl Med, 2018, 59(9): 9N-15N.
23. Valenta I, Quercioli A, Schindler T H. Diagnostic value of PET-measured longitudinal flow gradient for the identification of coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2014, 7(4): 387-396.
24. Khalaf S, Chamsi-Pasha M, Al-Mallah M H. Assessment of myocardial viability by PET. Curr Opin Cardiol, 2019, 34(5): 466-472.
25. Rischpler C, Langwieser N, Souvatzoglou M, et al. PET/MRI early after myocardial infarction: evaluation of viability with late Gadolinium enhancement transmurality vs. 18F-FDG uptake. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging, 2015, 16(6): 661-669.
26. Beitzke D, Rasul S, Lassen M L, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability in ischemic heart disease by PET/MRI: comparison of left ventricular perfusion, hibernation, and scar burden. Acad Radiol, 2020, 27(2): 188-197.
27. Kunze K P, Nekolla S G, Rischpler C, et al. Myocardial perfusion quantification using simultaneously acquired 13 NH₃-ammonia PET and dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI in patients at rest and stress. Magn Reson Med, 2018, 80(6): 2641-2654.
28. Masuda A, Nemoto A, Yamaki T, et al. Assessment of myocardial viability of a patient with old myocardial infarction by (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(4): 1423-1426.
29. Chareonthaitawee P, Beanlands R S, Chen W, et al. Joint SNMMI-ASNC expert consensus document on the role of (18)F-FDG PET/CT in cardiac sarcoid detection and therapy monitoring. J Nucl Med, 2017, 58(8): 1341-1353.
30. Lebasnier A, Legallois D, Bienvenu B, et al. Diagnostic value of quantitative assessment of cardiac (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose uptake in suspected cardiac sarcoidosis. Ann Nucl Med, 2018, 32(5): 319-327.
31. Vita T, Okada D R, Veillet-Chowdhury M, et al. Complementary value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in the assessment of cardiac sarcoidosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, 2018, 11(1): e007030.
32. Wada K, Niitsuma T, Yamaki T, et al. Simultaneous cardiac imaging to detect inflammation and scar tissue with (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI in cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2016, 23(5): 1180-1182.
33. Dweck M R, Abgral R, Trivieri M G, et al. Hybrid magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography with fluorodeoxyglucose to diagnose active cardiac sarcoidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2018, 11(1): 94-107.
34. Birnie D H, Nery P B, Ha A C, et al. Cardiac Sarcoidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2016, 68(4): 411-421.
35. Wisenberg G, Thiessen J D, Pavlovsky W, et al. Same day comparison of PET/CT and PET/MR in patients with cardiac sarcoidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019.
36. Gormsen L C, Haraldsen A, Kramer S, et al. A dual tracer (68)Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/CT pilot study for detection of cardiac sarcoidosis. EJNMMI Res, 2016, 6(1): 52.
37. Raina S, Lensing S Y, Nairooz R S, et al. Prognostic value of late Gadolinium enhancement CMR in systemic amyloidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2016, 9(11): 1267-1277.
38. Lee S P, Lee E S, Choi H, et al. 11C-Pittsburgh B PET imaging in cardiac amyloidosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging, 2015, 8(1): 50-59.
39. Pilebro B, Arvidsson S, Lindqvist P, et al. Positron emission tomography (PET) utilizing Pittsburgh compound B (PIB) for detection of amyloid heart deposits in hereditary transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR). J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(1): 240-248.
40. Trivieri M G, Dweck M R, Abgral R, et al. 18F-Sodium fluoride PET/MR for the assessment of cardiac amyloidosis. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2016, 68(24): 2712-2714.
41. Abulizi M, Sifaoui I, Wuliya-Gariepy M, et al. (18)F-sodium fluoride PET/MRI myocardial imaging in patients with suspected cardiac amyloidosis. J Nucl Cardiol, 2019.
42. Nensa F, Kloth J, Tezgah E, et al. Feasibility of FDG-PET in myocarditis: comparison to CMR using integrated PET/MRI. J Nucl Cardiol, 2018, 25(3): 785-794.

Journal of Biomedical Engineering

A review on cardiac positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis of cardivascular diseases

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content