Hunold P, Jakob H, Erbel R, Barkhausen J, Heilmaier C. Accuracy of myocardial viability imaging by cardiac MRI and PET depending on left ventricular function. World J Cardiol 2018; 10(9): 110-118 [PMID: 30344958 DOI: 10.4330/wjc.v10.i9.110]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Peter Hunold, MD, Assistant Professor, Vice Chairman, Clinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, Lübeck 23538, Germany. peterhunold@icloud.com
Research Domain of This Article
Cardiac & Cardiovascular Systems
Article-Type of This Article
Clinical Trials Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Baishideng Publishing Group Inc, 7041 Koll Center Parkway, Suite 160, Pleasanton, CA 94566, USA
Share the Article
Hunold P, Jakob H, Erbel R, Barkhausen J, Heilmaier C. Accuracy of myocardial viability imaging by cardiac MRI and PET depending on left ventricular function. World J Cardiol 2018; 10(9): 110-118 [PMID: 30344958 DOI: 10.4330/wjc.v10.i9.110]
World J Cardiol. Sep 26, 2018; 10(9): 110-118 Published online Sep 26, 2018. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v10.i9.110
Accuracy of myocardial viability imaging by cardiac MRI and PET depending on left ventricular function
Peter Hunold, Heinz Jakob, Raimund Erbel, Jörg Barkhausen, Christina Heilmaier
Peter Hunold, Jörg Barkhausen, Clinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck 23538, Germany
Heinz Jakob, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, West German Heart Center, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen 45122, Germany
Raimund Erbel, Department of Cardiology, West German Heart Center, University of Duisburg-Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen 45122, Germany
Christina Heilmaier, Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Stadtspital Triemli, Zürich 8063, Switzerland
Author contributions: Hunold P and Heilmaier C designed research; Hunold P, Heilmaier C, Barkhausen J, Erbel R and Jakob H acquired data; Hunold P, Heilmaier C and Barkhausen J analyzed data; Heilmaier C and Hunold P wrote the paper; Barkhausen J, Erbel R and Jakob H revised and approved final manuscript version
Institutional review board statement: This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional review board of the Medical Faculty of the University Essen, Germany (No. 00-142-1497).
Clinical trial registration statement: N/A.
Informed consent statement: All patients gave written informed consent to participate in the study prior to study inclusion and agreed to the evaluation and publication of their anonymized data.
Conflict-of-interest statement: None of the authors states a conflict of interest concerning firms and products reported in this study.
Correspondence to: Peter Hunold, MD, Assistant Professor, Vice Chairman, Clinic for Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, Lübeck 23538, Germany. peterhunold@icloud.com
Telephone: +49-451-50017010 Fax: +49-451-50017004
Received: March 29, 2018 Peer-review started: March 29, 2018 First decision: April 23, 2018 Revised: June 28, 2018 Accepted: August 5, 2018 Article in press: August 5, 2018 Published online: September 26, 2018 Processing time: 185 Days and 8.2 Hours
Core Tip
Core tip: Both cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (PET) are considered standard methods and reliable in myocardial viability imaging in coronary artery disease. However, CMR in general detects more scar and is, therefore, less optimistic in functional recovery prediction. Moreover, CMR and PET reveal different diagnostic accuracy depending on left ventricular (LV) function state: Particularly in severe and moderate LV function impairment, where revascularization is performed to improve function, CMR detects more scar and less viable myocardium - most probably due to higher spatial resolution. This aspect has not been reported, yet. Irrespective of LV function, PET might overestimate the improvement of regional and global function after revascularization.
