Back

Virtual myocardial blood flow and flow reserve from static PET imaging using artificial intelligence

Urs, M.; Kwiecinski, J.; Lemley, M.; Chareonthaitawee, P.; Ramirez, G.; Shanbhag, A.; Killekar, A.; DeKemp, R.; Acampa, W.; Le, V. T.; Mason, S.; Knight, S.; Packard, R. R. S.; Al-Mallah, M.; Berman, D. S.; Dey, D.; Miller, R. J. H.; Di Carli, M.; Slomka, P. J.

2026-02-05 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.02.03.26345376 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundQuantitative myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) provide incremental diagnostic and prognostic value in cardiac PET, but their widespread use is limited by the technical demands of dynamic imaging protocols. We evaluated the feasibility of using artificial intelligence (AI) to predict MBF and MFR from static and gated PET images, without the need for dynamic acquisition. MethodsA machine learning (XGBoost) model was trained on 82Rb PET multi-center dataset using static perfusion imaging, injected dose, hemodynamic measures, clinical data and CT-derived features (including body composition) from the hybrid CT attenuation scan. Model performance was evaluated externally in an independent cohort. ResultsIn total, 10,566 (derivation-cohort) and 7,842 (external-cohort) patients were included in this multi-center study. On the external-cohort, AI approach achieved an Area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (0.92-0.93) for abnormal stress MBF and 0.91 (0.90-0.92) for abnormal MFR; Intra-class correlation (ICC) 0.80 (0.78-0.82) and 0.78 (0.76-0.79), respectively. AI MFR closely mirrored the prognostic performance of measured MFR, showing nearly identical Kaplan-Meier risk stratification (both p<0.0001) and maintaining strong, and independently significant associations with all-cause mortality (HR 3.4 [2.8-4.2] vs. 4.6 [3.6-5.8]; both p<0.001), and demonstrated similar added value to perfusion for mortality prediction. ConclusionAI-predicted virtual stress MBF and MFR assessment using static and gated PET data is feasible and generalizable across cohorts. By removing the dependency on dynamic acquisitions, this approach has the potential to broaden the clinical adoption of flow quantification. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=97 SRC="FIGDIR/small/26345376v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (27K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@ec2522org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@17a04aforg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1c99db7org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1918c8f_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG STRUCTURED GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT PET: Positron Emission Tomography, CT: Computed Tomography, MFR: Myocardial Flow Reserve C_FIG Key Question: Can machine learning models trained on dynamic PET datasets accurately predict regional stress myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) from static image features, physiological parameters, and CT-based anatomical measures? Key Finding: Artificial intelligence can accurately estimate MBF and MFR from non-dynamic PET data, with strong agreement to reference standards. Take-home Message: By eliminating reliance on dynamic PET acquisitions, machine-learning has the potential to broaden clinical adoption of quantitative flow assessment.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.5%
2
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
9.2%
3
Medical Image Analysis
33 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
7.2%
4
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.8%
5
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
6
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 27%
4.3%
7
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
8
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
3.7%
9
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.7%
10
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.4%
11
Diagnostics
48 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.1%
12
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
13
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
MethodsX
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.7%
16
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.3%
17
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
18
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
19
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 52%
1.0%
21
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.9%
22
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
23
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
38 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
24
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
Journal of Translational Medicine
46 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
27
SLAS Technology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.7%
28
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
Biomedicines
66 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%