Comparison of the myocardial blood flow response to regadenoson and dipyridamole: a quantitative analysis in patients referred for clinical 82Rb myocardial perfusion PET

被引:35
|
作者
Goudarzi, Behnaz [2 ]
Fukushima, Kenji [2 ]
Bravo, Paco [2 ]
Merrill, Jennifer [2 ]
Bengel, Frank M. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Hannover Med Sch, Dept Nucl Med, D-30625 Hannover, Germany
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Div Nucl Med, Russell H Morgan Dept Radiol, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
PET; Myocardial flow reserve; Pharmacological vasodilation; Regadenoson; Coronary artery disease; POSITRON-EMISSION-TOMOGRAPHY; PLACEBO-CONTROLLED TRIAL; CORONARY-ARTERY-DISEASE; SELECTIVE A(2A) AGONIST; RECEPTOR AGONIST; PROGNOSTIC VALUE; DOUBLE-BLIND; ADENOSINE; SAFETY; RESERVE;
D O I
10.1007/s00259-011-1853-6
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Regadenoson is a novel selective A(2A) adenosine receptor agonist, which is administered as an intravenous bolus at a fixed dose. It is currently not clear if the absolute flow increase in response to this fixed dose is a function of distribution volume in individual patients or if it is generally comparable to the previous standard agents dipyridamole or adenosine, which are dosed based on weight. We used quantitative analysis of clinical Rb-82 PET/CT studies to obtain further insights. A total of 104 subjects with normal clinical rest/stress Rb-82 perfusion PET/CT were included in a retrospective analysis. To rule out confounding factors, none had evidence of prior cardiac disease, ischaemia or infarction, cardiomyopathy, diabetes with insulin use, calcium score > 400, renal disease or other significant systemic disease. A group of 52 patients stressed with regadenoson were compared with a group of 52 patients stressed with dipyridamole before regadenoson became available. The groups were matched for clinical characteristics, risk factors and baseline haemodynamics. Myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) were quantified using a previously validated retention model, after resampling of dynamic studies from list-mode Rb-82 datasets. At rest, heart rate, blood pressure and MBF were comparable between the groups. Regadenoson resulted in a significantly higher heart rate (34 +/- 14 vs. 23 +/- 10 beats per minute increase from baseline; p < 0.01) and rate-pressure product. Patients in the regadenoson group reported less severe symptoms and required less aminophylline. Stress MBF and MFR were not different between the groups (2.2 +/- 0.6 vs. 2.1 +/- 0.6 ml/min/g, p = 0.39, and 2.9 +/- 0.8 vs. 2.8 +/- 0.7, p = 0.31, respectively). In the regadenoson group, there was no correlation between stress flow or MFR and body weight or BMI. Despite its administration at a fixed dose, regadenoson results in an absolute increase in MBF which is comparable to that following dipyridamole administration and is independent of patient distribution volume. This further supports its usefulness as a clinical stress agent.
引用
收藏
页码:1908 / 1916
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Attenuation correction for stress and rest PET 82Rb myocardial perfusion images -: Reply
    Gould, K. Lance
    Pan, Tinsu
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2007, 48 (11) : 1913 - 1914
  • [42] Comparison of dynamic SPECT Myocardial Blood Flow and Flow Reserve with regadenoson and dipyridamole
    Bailly, M.
    Brana, Q.
    Thibault, F.
    Courtehoux, M.
    Metrard, G.
    Angoulvant, D.
    Ribeiro, M.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2020, 47 (SUPPL 1) : S328 - S329
  • [43] Detection and severity classification of extracardiac interference in 82Rb PET myocardial perfusion imaging
    Orton, Elizabeth J.
    Al Harbi, Ibraheem
    Klein, Ran
    Beanlands, Rob S. B.
    deKemp, Robert A.
    Wells, R. Glenn
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (10)
  • [44] Quantitative analysis of myocardial blood flow response to regadenoson and adenosine using 13N-ammonia perfusion PET.
    Weinberg, Richard
    Castano, Adam
    Panagiotou, Demetrios
    Kinkhabwala, Mona
    Bhatia, Ketan
    Morgenstern, Rachelle
    DeLuca, Albert
    Bokhari, Sabahat
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2015, 56 (03)
  • [45] Comparison of stress myocardial Flow Response using regadenoson and dipyridamole in SPECT
    Bailly, Matthieu
    Brana, Quentin
    Thibault, Frederique
    Courtehoux, Maxime
    Metrard, Gilles
    Angoulvant, Denis
    Santiago-Ribeiro, Maria-Joao
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2021, 62
  • [46] The added benefit of quantitative myocardial blood flow to standard Rb82 PET myocardial perfusion imaging and the correspondence to anatomical changes
    Meintjes, Marguerite
    Endozo, Raymond
    Dickson, John
    Menezes, Leon
    Bomanji, Jamshed
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2013, 54
  • [47] Variation in Maximum Counting Rates During Myocardial Blood Flow Quantification Using 82Rb PET
    van Dijk, Joris D.
    Jager, Pieter L.
    van Osch, Jochen A. C.
    van Dalen, Jorn A.
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2017, 58 (03) : 518 - 519
  • [48] Direct comparison of two clinical software packages for the quantification of absolute myocardial blood flow and flow reserve from 82Rb PET/CT images
    Piccinelli, Marina
    Cooke, Charles
    Goyal, Abhinav
    Mitchell, Adam
    Galt, James
    Moncayo, Valeria
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2023, 64
  • [49] Absolute myocardial flow quantification with 82Rb PET/CT: comparison of different software packages and methods
    Tahari, Abdel K.
    Lee, Andy
    Rajaram, Mahadevan
    Fukushima, Kenji
    Lodge, Martin A.
    Lee, Benjamin C.
    Ficaro, Edward P.
    Nekolla, Stephan
    Klein, Ran
    deKemp, Robert A.
    Wahl, Richard L.
    Bengel, Frank M.
    Bravo, Paco E.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2014, 41 (01) : 126 - 135
  • [50] Comparison of weight- and BMI-adjusted dosing for dynamic 82Rb PET myocardial perfusion imaging
    Arida-Moody, Liliana
    Moody, Jonathan
    Poitrasson-Riviere, Alexis
    Hagio, Tomoe
    Renaud, Jennifer
    Weinberg, Richard
    Corbett, James
    Ficaro, Edward
    Murthy, Venkatesh
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2020, 61