| Title |
The impact of prompt gamma compensation on myocardial blood flow measurements with rubidium-82 dynamic PET
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12350-016-0583-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ian S Armstrong, Matthew J Memmott, Christine M Tonge, Parthiban Arumugam |
| Abstract |
Rubidium-82 myocardial perfusion imaging is a well-established technique for assessing myocardial ischemia. With continuing interest on myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) measurements, there is a requirement to fully appreciate the impact of technical aspects of the process. One such factor for rubidium-82 is prompt gamma compensation (PGC). This study aims to assess the impact of PGC on MBF and MFR calculated from dynamic Rb-82 data. Dynamic rest and stress images were acquired on a Siemens Biograph mCT and reconstructed with and without PGC in 50 patients (29 male). MBF and MFR were measured in the three main coronary territories as well as globally. With PGC, statistically significant reductions in MBF were observed in LAD (-6.9%), LCx (-4.8%), and globally (-6.5%) but only in obese patients. Significant increases in MBF were observed in RCA (+6.4%) in only nonobese patients. In very obese patients, differences of up to 40% in MBF were observed between PGC and non-PGC images. In nearly all cases, similar PGC differences were observed at stress and rest so there were no significant differences in MFR; however, in a small number of very obese patients, differences in excess of 20% were observed. PGC results in statistically significant changes in MBF, with the greatest reductions observed in the LAD and LCx territories of obese patients. In most cases, the impact on stress and rest data is of similar relative magnitudes and changes to MFR are small. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 31% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 23% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 15% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,600,553
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#884
of 2,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,468
of 330,899 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nuclear Cardiology
#13
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,899 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.