Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Cardiology Reports
Published in: Current Cardiology Reports 4/2023

24-02-2023 | Silicone | Nuclear Cardiology (V Dilsizian, Section Editor)

Advances in Digital PET Technology and Its Potential Impact on Myocardial Perfusion and Blood Flow Quantification

Authors: Fares Alahdab, Mahmoud Al Rifai, Ahmed Ibrahim Ahmed, Mouaz H. Al-Mallah

Published in: Current Cardiology Reports | Issue 4/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose of Review

In this review, we explore the development of digital PET scanners and describe the mechanism by which they work. We dive into some technical details on what differentiates a digital PET from a conventional PET scanner and how such differences lead to better imaging characteristics. Additionally, we summarize the available evidence on the improvements in the images acquired by digital PET as well as the remaining pitfalls. Finally, we report the comparative studies available on how digital PET compares to conventional PET, particularly in the quantification of coronary blood flow.

Recent Findings

The advent of digital PET offers high sensitivity and time-of-flight (TOF), which allow lower activity and scan times, with much less risk of detector saturation. This allows faster patient throughput, scanning more patients per generator, and acquiring more consistent image quality across patients. The higher sensitivity captures more of the potential artifacts, particularly motion-related ones, which presents a current challenge that still needs to be tackled.

Summary

The digital silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) positron emission tomography (PET) machine has been an important development in the technological advancements of non-invasive nuclear cardiovascular imaging. It has enhanced the utility for PET myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) and myocardial blood flow (MBF) quantification.
Literature
1.
Al-Mallah MH, Sitek A, Moore SC, Di Carli M, Dorbala S. Assessment of myocardial perfusion and function with PET and PET/CT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2010;17:498–513.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
El-Tallawi KC, Aljizeeri A, Nabi F, Al-Mallah MH. Myocardial perfusion imaging using positron emission tomography. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. 2020;16:114–21.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
3.
Khalaf S, Chamsi-Pasha M, Al-Mallah MH. Assessment of myocardial viability by PET. Curr Opin Cardiol. 2019;34:466–72.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Case JA, deKemp RA, Slomka PJ, Smith MF, Heller GV, Cerqueira MD. Status of cardiovascular PET radiation exposure and strategies for reduction: an information statement from the cardiovascular PET Task Force. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:1427–39.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Bateman TM, Dilsizian V, Beanlands RS, DePuey EG, Heller GV, Wolinsky DA. American Society of Nuclear Cardiology and Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Joint Position Statement on the Clinical Indications for Myocardial Perfusion PET. J Nucl Cardiol. 2016;23:1227–31.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Ziadi MC, Dekemp RA, Williams K, et al. Does quantification of myocardial flow reserve using rubidium-82 positron emission tomography facilitate detection of multivessel coronary artery disease? J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:670–80.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Murthy VL, Bateman TM, Beanlands RS, et al. Clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow using PET: joint position paper of the SNMMI Cardiovascular Council and the ASNC. J Nucl Med. 2018;59:273–93.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Murthy VL, Naya M, Foster CR, et al. Improved cardiac risk assessment with noninvasive measures of coronary flow reserve. Circulation. 2011;124:2215–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Schindler TH. Myocardial perfusion PET for detection and reporting of coronary microvascular dysfunction: a consensus expert panel statement. J Am Coll Cardiol Img 2023.
10.
Doherty JU, Kort S, Mehran R, Schoenhagen P, Soman P. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Multimodality Imaging in Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1647–72.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Tarkin JM, Chen W, Dweck MR, Dilsizian V. Molecular imaging of valvular diseases and cardiac device infection. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2023;16: e014652.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Dilsizian V, Budde RPJ, Chen W, Mankad SV, Lindner JR, Nieman K. Best practices for imaging cardiac device-related infections and endocarditis: a JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging Expert Panel Statement. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;15:891–911.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Kim J, Feller ED, Chen W, Liang Y, Dilsizian V. FDG PET/CT for early detection and localization of left ventricular assist device infection: impact on patient management and outcome. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;12:722–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Tahari AK, Lee A, Rajaram M, et al. Absolute myocardial flow quantification with (82)Rb PET/CT: comparison of different software packages and methods. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014;41:126–35.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Nesterov SV, Deshayes E, Sciagra R, et al. Quantification of myocardial blood flow in absolute terms using (82)Rb PET imaging: the RUBY-10 Study. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;7:1119–27.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Renker D. New trends on photodetectors. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res, Sect A. 2007;571:1–6.CrossRef
17.
18.
Catana C, Wu Y, Judenhofer MS, Qi J, Pichler BJ, Cherry SR. Simultaneous acquisition of multislice PET and MR images: initial results with a MR-compatible PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1968–76.PubMed
19.
20.
Frach T, Prescher G, Degenhardt C, De Gruyter R, Schmitz A, Ballizany R. The digital silicon photomultiplier — principle of operation and intrinsic detector performance. 2009 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC). 2009.
21.
Wagatsuma K, Miwa K, Sakata M, et al. Comparison between new-generation SiPM-based and conventional PMT-based TOF-PET/CT. Phys Med. 2017;42:203–10.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Mirzoyan R, Laatiaoui M, Teshima M. Very high quantum efficiency PMTs with bialkali photo-cathode. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 2006;A:230–232.
23.
24.
Bondarenko G, Buzhan P, Dolgoshein B, Golovin V, Guschin E, Ilyin A, et al. Popova, K. Smirnov. Limited Geiger-mode microcell silicon photodiode: new results. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 187–192.
25.
Zhang J, Maniawski P, Knopp MV. Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET/CT system. EJNMMI Res. 2018;8:97.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Hughes PJ, Herbert D, Stewart A, Jackson JC. Tiled silicon photomultipliers for large-area low-light sensing applications. Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng. 2007.
27.
Stewart AG, Greene-O'Sullivan E, Herbert DJ, Saveliev V, Quinlan F, Wall L, Hughes PJ, Mathewson A, Jackson JC. Study of the properties of new SPM detectors. Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng. 2006;6119:1–10.
28.
Espana S, Tapias G, Fraile LM, Herraiz JL, Vicente E, Udias J, et al. Performance evaluation of SiPM detectors for PET imaging in the presence of magnetic fields. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec. 2008:M02–4.
29.
Schaart DR, Charbon E, Frach T, Schulz V. Schulz. Advances in digital SiPMs and their application in biomedical imaging. Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research Section Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 2016;48:31–52.
30.
Baratto L, Park SY, Hatami N, et al. 18F-FDG silicon photomultiplier PET/CT: A pilot study comparing semi-quantitative measurements with standard PET/CT. PLoS ONE. 2017;12: e0178936.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Nguyen NC, Vercher-Conejero JL, Sattar A, et al. Image quality and diagnostic performance of a digital PET prototype in patients with oncologic diseases: initial experience and comparison with analog PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1378–85.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Miller M, Zhang J, Binzel K, Griesmer J, Laurence T, Narayanan M,et al. Characterization of the Vereos Digital Photon Counting PET System. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:434.
33.
van Sluis J, de Jong J, Schaar J, et al. Performance characteristics of the digital biograph vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:1031–6.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Lecomte R. Novel detector technology for clinical PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36(Suppl 1):S69-85.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Del Guerra A, Belcari N, Bisogni MG, LLosa G, Marcatili S, Ambrosi G, et al. Advantages and pitfalls of the silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) as photodetector for the next generation of PET scanners. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 2010;617:223–226.
36.
Karp JS, Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. Benefit of time-of-flight in PET: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:462–70.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Conti M. Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1147–57.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Hsu DFC, Ilan E, Peterson WT, Uribe J, Lubberink M, Levin CS. Studies of a next-generation silicon-photomultiplier-based time-of-flight PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:1511–8.CrossRefPubMed
39.
40.
Zhang JMM, Knopp MV. Performance evaluation of digital PET/CT: medical physics basis for the clinical applications. Med Phys. 2016;43:3399.
41.
Li X, Qi W, Miyahara M, Kolthammer J. Performance characterization of an SiPM-based time-of-flight Canon PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med. 2020;61.
42.
• Klein R, deKemp RA. Selection of PET camera and implications on the reliability and accuracy of absolute myocardial blood flow quantification. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2020;22:109. This was a helpful review, from two years ago, on the different technical challenges with PET cameras and scanners, their potential solutions, and the resultant implications, for cardiovascular PET imaging, particularly MPI and quantification of MBF. CrossRefPubMed
43.
• Van Dijk JD, Jager PL, Van Osch JAC, Khodaverdi M, Van Dalen JA. Comparison of maximal Rubidium-82 activities for myocardial blood flow quantification between digital and conventional PET systems. J Nucl Cardiol. 2019;26:1286–91. This study offered a very interesting comparison between three different systems for PET-based MBF quantification. Two of them were conventional PET scanners and the third was a digital PET scanner prototype.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Levin C, Peterson W, Ross S, Stearns C, Uribe J. PET performance as a function of axial field of view for a new silicon photomultiplier-based whole body TOF PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2016;57.
45.
Pan T, Einstein SA, Kappadath SC, et al. Performance evaluation of the 5-Ring GE Discovery MI PET/CT system using the national electrical manufacturers association NU 2–2012 Standard. Med Phys. 2019;46:3025–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
46.
Armstrong IS, Hayden C, Memmott MJ, Arumugam P. A preliminary evaluation of a high temporal resolution data-driven motion correction algorithm for rubidium-82 on a SiPM PET-CT system. J Nucl Cardiol. 2022;29:56–68.CrossRefPubMed
47.
•• Han Y, Ahmed AI, Hayden C, Jung AK, Saad JM, Spottiswoode B, et al. Change in positron emission tomography perfusion imaging quality with a data-driven motion correction algorithm. J Nucl Cardiol. 2022. A novel data-driven motion correction algorithm was developed and evaluated for cardiac PET imaging. When compared to non-corrected images, the developed algorithm allowed an improvement in quality. Physician interpretation was correlated with machine measurement of motion quantification. 
48.
DIETZ M, Kamani CH, Allenbach G, Rubimbura V, Fournier S, Lalonde MN, et al. Comparison of the prognostic value of global and regional myocardial flow capacity radius, myocardial flow reserve, and stress myocardial blood flow using Rubidium-82 with SiPM PET/CT. Preprint-Research Square. 2021.
49.
DIETZ M, Kamani CH, Allenbach G, Rubimbura V, Fournier S, Lalonde MN, et al. Prognostic value of myocardial flow capacity and global absolute perfusion measurements using Rubidium-82 with SiPM PET/CT. Annual Congress of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine October 15–19. Barcelona, Spain. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;2022(49):S67-68.
50.
•• Ahmed AI, Al Rifai M, Alahdab F, Saad JM, Han Y, Alfawara MS, et al. Incremental prognostic value of digital positron emission tomography derived myocardial flow reserve: a prospective cohort study. Int J Cardiol. 2022. This study assessed the potential incremental prognostic prediction added by quantifying MFR using digital PET scanners. The result was a significantly improved discrimination coefficient using an MFR cutoff of 2 quantified by the digital PET machine.
51.
Lortie M, Beanlands RS, Yoshinaga K, Klein R, Dasilva JN, DeKemp RA. Quantification of myocardial blood flow with 82Rb dynamic PET imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1765–74.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Advances in Digital PET Technology and Its Potential Impact on Myocardial Perfusion and Blood Flow Quantification
Authors
Fares Alahdab
Mahmoud Al Rifai
Ahmed Ibrahim Ahmed
Mouaz H. Al-Mallah
Publication date
24-02-2023
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Cardiology Reports / Issue 4/2023
Print ISSN: 1523-3782
Electronic ISSN: 1534-3170
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-023-01850-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2023

Current Cardiology Reports 4/2023 Go to the issue

Cardiac PET, CT, and MRI (P Cremer, Section Editor)

Improved Performance of PET Myocardial Perfusion Imaging Compared to SPECT in the Evaluation of Suspected CAD

Myocardial Disease (A Abbate and M Merlo, Section Editors)

Towards a New Classification of Cardiomyopathies

Psychological Aspects of Cardiovascular Diseases (IM Kronish, Section Editor)

Establishing a Care Continuum for Cardiometabolic Conditions for Patients with Serious Mental Illness

Invasive Electrophysiology and Pacing (EK Heist, Section Editor)

Sudden Cardiac Death Risk Stratification of the Early Repolarization Syndrome: An Updated Review of the Literature

Psychological Aspects of Cardiovascular Diseases (IM Kronish, Section Editor)

Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Focused Review for Practicing Clinicians

Heart Failure (HJ Eisen, Section Editor)

Review of Pathophysiology of Cardiogenic Shock and Escalation of Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

ACC 2024 Congress Coverage

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Heart Failure Video

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.

Watch now

Semaglutide benefits people with type 2 diabetes and obesity-related heart failure

16-04-2024 Type 2 Diabetes News

Incentivised to exercise

11-04-2024 Lifestyle Modifications News

New intervention for STEMI-related cardiogenic shock

10-04-2024 Myocardial Infarction News

» View more highlights on the ACC 2024 congress hub page

Image Credits