Medizinische Universität Graz - Research portal

Go directly to the nagivation.
Go directly to the content.

Navigation/Search

Selected Publication:

SHR Neuro Cancer Cardio Lipid Metab Microb

van, der, Pol, JAJ; Rahel, B; van, Cauteren, YJM; Moonen, RPM; Meeder, JG; Gerretsen, SC; Aizaz, M; Prieto, C; Botnar, RM; Bucerius, J; van, Langen, H; Wildberger, JE; Holtackers, RJ; Kooi, ME.
Molecular Imaging of Coronary Plaque Vulnerability Using 18F-Fluorocholine PET-MRI in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: Validation with Optical Coherence Tomography.
J Clin Med. 2025; 14(24): Doi: 10.3390/jcm14248708 [OPEN ACCESS]
Web of Science PubMed FullText FullText_MUG

Co-authors Med Uni Graz: Bucerius Jan Alexander
Altmetrics:
Dimensions Citations:
Plum Analytics:
Scite (citation analytics):
Abstract:: Background/Objectives: 18F-fluorocholine is a positron emission tomography (PET) tracer earlier found to be a marker of macrophage content in carotid plaques. We aimed to assess the feasibility of 18F-choline PET-MRI to non-invasively localize vulnerable coronary plaques, using optical coherence tomography (OCT) as a reference standard. Methods: Patients with recent myocardial infarction who were scheduled for a secondary angiography of a non-culprit vessel underwent 18F-fluorocholine coronary PET-MRI. Subsequently, OCT was performed during the secondary angiography. Maximum target-to-background (TBRmax) values of 18F-fluorocholine uptake were determined in two vessel sections that contained either vulnerable or stable plaques as defined by OCT. The OCT-based definition of a vulnerable plaque was a fibrous cap thickness < 70 µm. To enhance the detectability of coronary plaques using PET, three different motion-correction strategies were used: multigate respiratory gating motion correction (MRG-MOCO), extended MR-based motion correction (eMR-MOCO), and extended MR-based motion correction with ECG gating (eMR-MOCO-ECG). Results: Fifteen patients were included in this study. One patient needed to be excluded due to extravasation of the tracer. In another patient, no region with only a stable plaque could be identified. TBRmax values were as follows for three different reconstructions in vulnerable versus stable plaques: MRG-MOCO: mean TBRmax 1.45 vs. 1.35, p = 0.52 (n = 13); eMR-MOCO: mean TBRmax 1.47 vs. 1.27, p = 0.26 (n = 11); eMR-MOCO-ECG: mean TBRmax 1.49 vs. 1.26, p = 0.21 (n = 11). Conclusions: 18F-fluorocholine uptake in vulnerable atherosclerotic plaques in coronary arteries was not significantly different from uptake in stable plaques, even though advanced motion-correction methods were applied. That may be caused by multiple factors, such as small coronary plaque size, tracer biology, or remaining cardiac motion.
Find related publications in this database (Keywords): fluorocholine; PET-MRI; optical coherence tomography; plaque imaging; atherosclerosis