A cross-comparison between PMOD and HeartSee for absolute quantification of myocardial blood flow in PET imaging

Abstract Background: PMOD and the HeartSee software are commonly used to quantify myocardial perfusion. PMOD typically uses a one-tissue compartment model, whereas, HeartSee uses a simple retention model that is considered a special case of the one-tissue compartment model. We explored agreement in the absolute quantification of myocardial perfusion and the diagnostic performance of coronary microvascular dysfunction by comparison of PMOD and HeartSee in non-obstructive patients. Results: The rest myocardial blood flow of PMOD was higher than that of HeartSee (1.02±0.22 vs. 0.92±0.23, p <0.05), but there was no statistically significant difference between the stress myocardial blood flow. However, the myocardial flow reserve of HeartSee was higher than that of PMOD (2.96±0.73 vs. 2.64±0.51, p <0.05). The myocardial blood flow and myocardial flow reserve of the two softwares correlated (r: 0.35-0.49, both p <0.05). The receiver-operating characteristic curve revealed a cutoff value for the HeartSee myocardial flow reserve at 2.885 to predict abnormal PMOD myocardial flow reserve, yielding an accuracy of 72%. Conclusions: The absolute quantification values obtained by PMOD and HeartSee were different. However, the diagnostic accuracy of HeartSee for abnormal myocardial flow reserve with a PET myocardial flow reserve less than two was 72%.