A statistically significant correlation was observed between the severity of anatomic stenosis and coronary flow reserve in experimental animals. A similar correlation in human coronary artery disease (CAD) was shown using positron emission tomography (PET) and pharmacologic vasodilator stress. The present study tested whether the concept of relative myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) might be superior to absolute MPR in correlating coronary stenosis determined by quantitative coronary arteriography in patients with single vessel CAD using [13N]ammonia and PET. The study group comprised 21 patients (62(plus or minus)10 years old; 15 men, 6 women) with normal left ventricular function who underwent angioplasty for isolated left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. Absolute MPR, the ratio of dipyridamole-induced hyperemic blood flow to baseline blood flow by [13N]ammonia PET, and relative MPR, the ratio of MPR in regions supplied by stenosed coronary arteries to MPR in remote regions, were measured before and 3 months after angioplasty. The percent diameter stenosis was also quantified on coronary arteriograms just before the angioplasty and again at 3 months after. The study found that absolute MPR (r=0.755; p<0.0001) and relative MPR (r=0.814; p<0.0001) were inversely and nonlinearly correlated with the percent stenosis on angiography. The fitting curve of the correlation between relative MPR and coronary stenosis on angiography was identical to that observed in animal models. Therefore, relative MPR measured by [13N]ammonia PET more accurately and specifically describes stenosis severity in patients with CAD compared with absolute MPR, probably because of its independence from hemodynamic variations and the effects of coronary risk factors.
FUJIWARA, M. (2001). 13.60 Role of relative myocardial perfusion reserve for evaluating stenosis severity in patients with single vessel coronary artery disease using [13N] ammonia and positron emission tomography. Journal of Nuclear Cardiology, 8(1), S92–S92. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1071-3581(01)80775-3