Quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated 99mTc-MIBI SPECT: MRI validation and comparison of the Emory Cardiac Tool Box with QGS and 4D-MSPECT.

The goal of this study was to validate the accuracy of the Emory Cardiac Tool Box (ECTB) in assessing left ventricular end-diastolic or end-systolic volume (EDV, ESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) from gated (99m)Tc-methoxyisobutylisonitrile ((99m)Tc-MIBI) SPECT using cardiac MRI (cMRI) as a reference. Furthermore, software-specific characteristics of ECTB were analyzed in comparison with 4D-MSPECT and Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS) results (all relative to cMRI). METHODS: Seventy patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease were examined using gated (99m)Tc-MIBI SPECT (8 gates/cardiac cycle) 60 min after tracer injection at rest. EDV, ESV, and LVEF were calculated from gated (99m)Tc-MIBI SPECT using ECTB, 4D-MSPECT, and QGS. Directly before or after gated SPECT, cMRI (20 gates/cardiac cycle) was performed as a reference. EDV, ESV, and LVEF were calculated using Simpson's rule. RESULTS: Correlation between results of gated (99m)Tc-MIBI SPECT and cMRI was high for EDV (R = 0.90 [ECTB], R = 0.88 [4D-MSPECT], R = 0.92 [QGS]), ESV (R = 0.94 [ECTB], R = 0.96 [4D-MSPECT], R = 0.96 [QGS]), and LVEF (R = 0.85 [ECTB], R = 0.87 [4D-MSPECT], R = 0.89 [QGS]). EDV (ECTB) did not differ significantly from cMRI, whereas 4D-MSPECT and QGS underestimated EDV significantly compared with cMRI (mean +/- SD: 131 +/- 43 mL [ECTB], 127 +/- 42 mL [4D-MSPECT], 120 +/- 38 mL [QGS], 137 +/- 36 mL [cMRI]). For ESV, only ECTB yielded values that were significantly lower than cMRI. For LVEF, ECTB and 4D-MSPECT values did not differ significantly from cMRI, whereas QGS values were significantly lower than cMRI (mean +/- SD: 62.7% +/- 13.7% [ECTB], 59.0% +/- 12.7% [4DM-SPECT], 53.2% +/- 11.5% [QGS], 60.6% +/- 13.9% [cMRI]). CONCLUSION: EDV, ESV, and LVEF as determined by ECTB, 4D-MSPECT, and QGS from gated (99m)Tc-MIBI SPECT agree over a wide range of clinically relevant values with cMRI. Nevertheless, any algorithm-inherent over- or underestimation of volumes and LVEF should be accounted for and an interchangeable use of different software packages should be avoided.     

Prone versus supine patient positioning during gated 99mTc-sestamibi SPECT: effect on left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction, and heart rate.

Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT allows assessment of left ventricular end-diastolic volume (EDV), left ventricular end-systolic volume (ESV), left ventricular stroke volume (SV), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Acquiring images with the patient both prone and supine is an approved method of identifying and reducing artifacts. Yet prone positioning alters physiologic conditions. This study investigated how prone versus supine patient positioning during gated SPECT affects EDV, ESV, SV, LVEF, and heart rate. METHODS: Forty-eight patients scheduled for routine myocardial perfusion imaging were examined with gated (99m)Tc-sestamibi SPECT (at rest) while positioned prone and supine (consecutively, in random order). All parameters for both acquisitions were calculated using the commercially available QGS algorithm. RESULTS: Whereas EDV and SV were significantly lower (P < 0.0004) for prone acquisitions (EDV, 110.5 +/- 39.1 mL; SV, 55.9 +/- 13.3 mL) than for supine acquisitions (EDV, 116.9 +/- 36.2 mL; SV, 61.0 +/- 14.5 mL), ESV and LVEF did not differ significantly. Heart rate was significantly higher (P < 0.0001) during prone acquisitions (69.1 +/- 10.5 min(-1)) than during supine acquisitions (66.5 +/- 10.0 min(-1)). CONCLUSION: The observed position-dependent effect on EDV, SV, and heart rate might be explained by decreased arterial filling and increased sympathetic nerve activity. Hence, supine reference data should not be used to classify the results of prone acquisitions.     

Validation of QGS and 4D-MSPECT for quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated 18F-FDG PET: comparison with cardiac MRI.

The aim of this study was to validate Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS) and 4D-MSPECT for assessing left ventricular end-diastolic and systolic volumes (EDV and ESV, respectively) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from gated (18)F-FDG PET. METHODS: Forty-four patients with severe coronary artery disease were examined with gated (18)F-FDG PET (8 gates per cardiac cycle). EDV, ESV, and LVEF were calculated from gated (18)F-FDG PET using QGS and 4D-MSPECT. Within 2 d (median), cardiovascular cine MRI (cMRI) (20 gates per cardiac cycle) was done as a reference. RESULTS: QGS failed to accurately detect myocardial borders in 1 patient; 4D-MSPECT, in 2 patients. For the remaining 42 patients, correlation between the results of gated (18)F-FDG PET and cMRI was high for EDV (R = 0.94 for QGS and 0.94 for 4D-MSPECT), ESV (R = 0.95 for QGS and 0.95 for 4D-MSPECT), and LVEF (R = 0.94 for QGS and 0.90 for 4D-MSPECT). QGS significantly (P < 0.0001) underestimated LVEF, whereas no other parameter differed significantly between gated (18)F-FDG PET and cMRI for either algorithm. CONCLUSION: Despite small systematic differences that, among other aspects, limit interchangeability, agreement between gated (18)F-FDG PET and cMRI is good across a wide range of clinically relevant volumes and LVEF values assessed by QGS and 4D-MSPECT.     

Validation of an evaluation routine for left ventricular volumes,ejection fraction and wall motion from gated cardiac FDG PET: a comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

The aim of this study was to validate the estimation of left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) as well as wall motion analysis from gated fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) in patients with severe coronary artery disease (CAD) using software originally designed for gated single-photon emission tomography (SPET). Thirty patients with severe CAD referred for myocardial viability diagnostics were investigated using a standard FDG PET protocol enhanced with gated acquisition (8 gates per cardiac cycle). EDV, ESV and LVEF were calculated using standard software designed for gated SPET (QGS). Wall motion was analysed using a visual four-point wall motion score on a 17-segment model. As a reference, all patients were also examined within a median of 3 days with cardiovascular cine magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) (20 gates per cardiac cycle). Furthermore, all gated FDG PET data sets were reoriented in a second run with deliberately misaligned axes to test the quantification procedure for robustness. Correlation between the results of gated FDG PET and cMRI was very high for EDV and ESV ( R=0.96 and R=0.97) and for LVEF ( R=0.95). With gated FDG PET, there was a non-significant tendency to underestimate EDV (174+/-61 ml vs 179+/-59 ml, P=0.21) and to overestimate ESV (124+/-58 ml vs 122+/-60 ml, P=0.65), resulting in underestimated LVEF values (31.5%+/-9.4% vs 34.2%+/-12.4%, P<0.003). The results of reorientations 1 and 2 showed very high correlations (for all R>/=0.99). Segmental wall motion analysis revealed good agreement between gated FDG PET data and cMRI (kappa =0.62+/-0.03). In conclusion, despite small systematic differences which contributed mainly to the lower temporal resolution of gated FDG PET, agreement between gated FDG PET and cMRI was good across a wide range of volumes and LVEF values as well as for wall motion analysis. Therefore, gated FDG PET provides clinically relevant information on function and volumes, using the commercially available software package QGS.     

Evaluation of cardiac resynchronization therapy in drug-resistant dilated-phase hypertrophic cardiomyopathy by means of Tc-99m sestamibi ECG-gated SPECT

This case describes a 65-year-old male with drug-resistant heart failure. Cardiac resynchronization therapy was performed. We evaluated cardiac function with volume curve differentiation software (VCDiff) from QGS data with Tc-99m sestamibi. Left ventricular parameters during atrial-right ventricular pacing were left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 30%, end-diastolic volume (EDV) 156 ml, end-systolic volume (ESV) 108 ml and peak filling rate 1.12 (EDV/sec). And during dual chamber pacing, those were LVEF 35%, EDV 145 ml and ESV 95 ml and PFR 1.58 (EDV/sec). And during atrial-left ventricular pacing, those were LVEF 36%, EDV 152 ml, ESV 97 ml and peak filling rate (PFR) 1.35 (EDV/sec). Cardiac resynchronization therapy may improve cardiac function as well as dyssynchrony, which could be evaluated non-invasively and accurately by ECG-gated SPECT.     

Evaluation of the left ventricular hemodynamic function and myocardial perfusion by gated single photon emission tomography, in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus; prodromal signs of cardiovascular disease after four years

The aim of this study was to assess the changes in hemodynamic function and myocardial perfusion of the left ventricle occurring in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1) 47-49 months after the first assessment. We have studied 20 asymptomatic patients, five females and 15 males, aged 22-46 y. The patients were under intensive insulin treatment and had normal electrocardiogram (ECG) at rest. In all patients gated single photon emission tomography (GSPET) was performed at rest and after exercise (examination I). After 47-49 months this test was repeated (examination II). GSPET was performed 60 min after the intravenous injection of 740 MBq of technetium-99m 2-methoxy-isobutyl-isonitrile ((99m)Tc-MIBI), using a dual-headed gamma-camera. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end diastolic volume (EDV) and end systolic volume (ESV) were calculated using quantitative GSPET (QGS). The intensity of perfusion defects was also evaluated based on a four degree QGS scale. Our results were as follows: a) In examination I, performed at rest: LVEF was 56.1%+/-7.5%, EDV 96.9+/-25.8 ml and ESV 42.6+/-16.3 ml. b) In examination I at stress: LVEF was 57.2%+/-7.5%, EDV 94.1+/-24.0 ml and ESV 40.5+/-15.5. c) In examination II performed at rest: LVEF was 58.1%+/-6.5%, EDV 112.1+/-26.1 ml and ESV 46.6+/-14.9 ml and d) In examination II at stress: LVEF 57.8%+/-5.6%, EDV 107.9+/-27.4 ml and ESV 44.9+/-14.4 ml. Significant differences were found between examinations I and II, regarding: a) EDV at rest (P<0.001) and at stress (P<0.001) and b) ESV at rest (P<0.05) and at stress (P<0.005). Correlation analysis revealed significant correlation between LVEF at rest and at stress both in examination I (r=0.83; P<0.001) and also in examination II (r=-0.897; P<0.001). Intensity of myocardial perfusion defects in examination I at rest and at stress was: 1.68+/-0.5 and 2.2+/-0.6 degrees respectively. Intensity of myocardial perfusion defects in examination II at rest and at stress was: 1.75+/-0.4 and 2.2+/-0.5 respectively. No significant differences in the intensity of these perfusion defects were found. EDV both at rest and at stress was significantly higher in examination II as compared with the examination I study. Similar, but less pronounced changes of ESV were found. This study confirms other authors' observations on LV, EDV and LV, ESV and also that the percentage of asymptomatic DM1 patients having silent myocardial ischemia is high as was in all our patients. Nevertheless, in the current literature, we were unable to find a study similar to the present one, comparing basal and after four years LV functional GSPET data, in asymptomatic DM1 patients. In conclusion, myocardial perfusion GSPET was useful as a screening test in DM1 patients in showing four years after the basal study, prodromal signs of cardiovascular disease, especially increase of left ventricular volumes and silent myocardial ischemia, in these patients. Our research on the above protocol is being continued.     

滤波反投影法和OSEM重建图像测量心功能参数的比较

目的比较静息门控心肌显像滤波反投影法（FBP）和OSEM重建图像后用定量门控心肌断层显像（QGS）、四维模型心肌断层显像（4D—MSPECT）、爱莫瑞心脏工具箱（ECToolbox）软件测量的心功能参数。方法临床疑诊或确诊冠心病患者144例,均行^99Tc^m-MIBI静息门控心肌SPECT显像,所有患者均用FBP和OSEM重建图像,用QGS、4D—MSPECT、ECToolbox软件计算心功能参数LVEF,EDV和ESV,采用Bland—Altman法检验2种重建方法的一致性,配对t检验方法检验心功能参数差异,相关性分析用直线回归分析。结果FBP和OSEM重建测量的心功能参数一致性和相关性好（r均〉0．93,P均〈0．001）。QGS软件FBP重建测得的EDV低于OSEM重建测得的EDV,其他2种软件为FBP高于OSEM[QGS：（82．2±39．1）ml和（83．5±40．8）ml,t=-2．53,P〈0．05;4D—MSPECT：（93．5±46．9）ml和（88．8±45．2）ml,t=5．95,P〈0．01;ECToolbox：（106．4±51．1）ml和（100．8±49．0）ml,t=3．99,P〈0．01]。对于ESV,4D-MSPECT软件FBP测量值高于OSEM[（37．5±41．4）ml和（34．8±37．6）ml,t=3．92,P〈0．01]。QGS软件FBP测得的LVEF低于OSEM测得的LVEF[（62．1±16．9）％和（63．1±16．1）％,t=-3．14,P〈0．01]。ECToolbox软件FBP测得的LVEF高于用OSEM测得的LVEF[（74．1±18．8）％和（71．3±17．1）％,t=5．28,P〈0．01]。结论2种重建方法所测量的心功能参数虽然相关性和一致性很好,但某些参数值差异有统计学意义。     

Assessment of left ventricular function and volumes for patients with dilated cardiomyopathy using gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and comparison with echocardiography

AIM: Left ventricular function, volumes and regional wall motion provide valuable diagnostic information and are of long-term prognostic importance in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). This study was designed to compare the effectiveness of two-dimensional echocardiography and gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) to evaluate these parameters in patients with DCM. METHODS: Gated SPECT and two-dimensional echocardiography were performed in 45 patients with DCM, and in 10 normal subjects as the control group. Patients were divided into two groups according to the aetiology of DCM: group I, ischaemic DCM (n=30); group II, non-ischaemic DCM (n=15). All patients and the control group underwent resting myocardial gated SPECT, 45 min after injection of 555 MBq of Tc-methoxyisobutyl-isonitrile (Tc-MIBI). Gated SPECT data, including left ventricular volumes and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), were processed using an automated algorithm. Simpson's method was used to evaluate these parameters. Regional wall motion was evaluated using both modalities and scored using a 16-segment model with a five-point scoring system. Perfusion defects were expressed as a percentage of the whole myocardium planimetered by a bull's-eye polar map of composite non-gated SPECT. Myocardial perfusion was scored using a 16-segment model with a four-point scoring system. RESULTS: Mean perfusion defects and perfusion defect scores were 25+/-13% and 1.12+/-0.36 in group I and 4+/-8% and 0.76+/-0.26 in group II (P<0.01). The overall agreement between the two imaging modalities for the assessment of regional wall motion was 57% (403/720 segments: 269/480 segments in group I and 134/240 segments in group II). With gated SPECT, LVEF was 27+/-9%, the end-diastolic volume (EDV) was 212+/-71 ml and the end-systolic volume (ESV) was 160+/-67 ml. With echocardiography, these values were 29+/-8%, 197+/-56 ml and 139+/-47 ml, respectively. The correlation between gated SPECT and two-dimensional echocardiography was good (r=0.72, P<0.01) for the assessment of LVEF. The correlation was also good for EDV and ESV, but with wider limits of agreement (r= 0.71, P<0.01 and r=0.71, P<0.01, respectively) and with significantly higher values with gated SPECT (P<0.01). For patients with a perfusion defect of <20% or low myocardial perfusion scores, a higher correlation was found between the two methods for the assessment of LVEF, EDV and ESV. On the other hand, the correlation was lower for the assessment of wall motion. CONCLUSIONS: Gated SPECT and two-dimensional echocardiography correlate well for the assessment of left ventricular function and volumes. Gated SPECT has the advantage of providing information about left ventricular function, dimensions and perfusion.     

Comparison of two three-dimensional gated SPECT methods with thallium in patients with large myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Two different commercially available gated single photon emission computed tomography (GSPECT) methods were compared in a population of patients with a major myocardial infarction. METHODS: Rest thallium GSPECT was performed with a 90-degree dual-detector camera, 4 hours after injection of thallium-201 (Tl-201; 185 MBq) in 43 patients (mean age, 62+/-12 years) with a large myocardial infarction (mean defect size, 33%+/-16%). End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were calculated by using QGS (Cedars Sinai) and MultiDim (Sopha Medical Vision International, Buc, France). Images were reconstructed by using a 2.5 zoom and a Butterworth filter (order, 5; cut-off frequency, 0.20). LVEF was calculated in all patients by using equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography (ERNA). EDV, ESV, and LVEF were also measured by using left ventriculography (LVG). RESULTS: Compared with LVG, QGS underestimated LVEF by means of an underestimation of mean EDV. MultiDim overestimated EDV and ESV. GSPECT EDV and ESV overestimation was demonstrated by means of Bland-Altman analysis to increase with left ventricular volume size (P<.05). The difference between LVG and GSPECT volumes was demonstrated by means of regression analysis to be correlated with infarction size. This effect was particularly important with MultiDim (P<.0001). CONCLUSION: In Tl-201 GSPECT, LVEF and volume measurements will vary according to the type of software used.     

Comparison of left ventricular functional parameters obtained from three different commercial automated software cardiac quantification program packages and their intraobserver reproducibility

Objective  

ECG-gated myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) can be used to determine several cardiac functional parameters (e.g., left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), and end-systolic volume (ESV)). In this study, we aimed to compare these cardiac functional parameters calculated by the following cardiac quantification programs: Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb), Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS), and Myometrix. We also evaluated reproducibility of the cardiac programs.     

Validation of 4D-MSPECT and QGS for quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated <Superscript>99m</Superscript>Tc-MIBI SPET: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging

The main aim of this study was to validate the accuracy of 4D-MSPECT in the assessment of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic/end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) from gated technetium-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile single-photon emission tomography (^99mTc-MIBI SPET), using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) as the reference method. By further comparing 4D-MSPECT and QGS with cMRI, the software-specific characteristics were analysed to elucidate clinical applicability. Fifty-four patients with suspected or proven coronary artery disease (CAD) were examined with gated ^99mTc-MIBI SPET (8 gates/cardiac cycle) about 60 min after tracer injection at rest. LV EDV, ESV and LVEF were calculated from gated ^99mTc-MIBI SPET using 4D-MSPECT and QGS. On the same day, cMRI (20 gates/cardiac cycle) was performed, with LV EDV, ESV and LVEF calculated using Simpsons rule. Both algorithms worked with all data sets. Correlation between the results of gated ^99mTc-MIBI SPET and cMRI was high for EDV [R=0.89 (4D-MSPECT), R=0.92 (QGS)], ESV [R=0.96 (4D-MSPECT), R=0.96 (QGS)] and LVEF [R=0.89 (4D-MSPECT), R=0.90 (QGS)]. In contrast to ESV, EDV was significantly underestimated by 4D-MSPECT and QGS compared to cMRI [130±45 ml (4D-MSPECT), 122±41 ml (QGS), 139±36 ml (cMRI)]. For LVEF, 4D-MSPECT and cMRI revealed no significant differences, whereas QGS yielded significantly lower values than cMRI [57.5%±13.7% (4D-MSPECT), 52.2%±12.4% (QGS), 60.0%±15.8% (cMRI)]. In conclusion, agreement between gated ^99mTc-MIBI SPET and cMRI is good across a wide range of clinically relevant LV volume and LVEF values assessed by 4D-MSPECT and QGS. However, algorithm-varying underestimation of LVEF should be accounted for in the clinical context and limits interchangeable use of software.     

Thallium-gated SPECT in patients with major myocardial infarction: effect of filtering and zooming in comparison with equilibrium radionuclide imaging and left ventriculography.

The effect of filtering and zooming on 201TI-gated SPECT was evaluated in patients with major myocardial infarction. METHODS: Rest thallium (TI)-gated SPECT was performed with a 90 degrees dual-head camera, 4 h after injection of 185 MBq 201TI in 32 patients (mean age 61 +/- 11 y) with large myocardial infarction (33% +/- 17% defect on bull's eye). End diastolic volume (EDV), end systolic volume (ESV) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were calculated using a commercially available semiautomatic validated software. First, images were reconstructed using a 2.5 zoom, a Butterworth filter (order = 5) and six Nyquist cutoff frequencies: 0.13 (B5.13), 0.15 (B5.15), 0.20 (B5.20), 0.25 (B5.25), 0.30 (B5.30) and 0.35 (B5.35). Second, images were reconstructed using a zoom of 1 and a Butterworth filter (order = 5) (cutoff frequency 0.20 [B5.20Z1]) (total = 32 x 7 = 224 reconstructions). LVEF was calculated in all patients using equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography (ERNA). EDV, ESV and LVEF were measured with contrast left ventriculography (LVG). RESULTS: LVEF was 39% +/- 2% (mean +/- SEM) for ERNA and 40% +/- 13% for LVG (P = 0.51). Gated SPECT with B5.20Z2.5 simultaneously offered a mean LVEF value (39% +/- 2%) similar to ERNA (39% +/- 2%) and LVG (40% +/- 3%), optimal correlations with both ERNA (r = 0.83) and LVG (r = 0.70) and minimal differences with both ERNA (-0.9% +/- 7.5% [mean +/- SD]) and LVG (1.1% +/- 10.5%). As a function of filter and zoom choice, correlation coefficients between ERNA or LVG LVEF, and gated SPECT ranged from 0.26 to 0.88; and correlation coefficients between LVG and gated SPECT volumes ranged from 0.87 to 0.94. There was a significant effect of filtering and zooming on EDV, ESV and LVEF (P < 0.0001). Low cutoff frequency (B5.13) overestimated LVEF (P < 0.0001 versus ERNA and LVG). Gated SPECT with 2.5 zoom and high cutoff frequencies (B5.15, B5.20, B5.25, B5.30 and B5.35) overestimated EDV and ESV (P < 0.04) compared with LVG. This volume overestimation with TI-gated SPECT in patients with large myocardial infarction was correlated to the infarct size. A zoom of 1 underestimated EDV, ESV and LVEF compared with a 2.5 zoom (P < 0.02). CONCLUSION: Accurate LVEF measurement is possible with TI-gated SPECT in patients with major myocardial infarction. However, filtering and zooming greatly influence EDV, ESV and LVEF measurements, and TI-gated SPECT overestimates left ventricular volumes, particularly when the infarct size increases.     

Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction calculated from quantitative electrocardiographic-gated 99mTc-tetrofosmin myocardial SPECT.

We compared the left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) as calculated by Cedars automated quantitative gated SPECT (QGS) to those determined by first-pass radionuclide angiography (FPRNA) and contrast left ventriculography (LVG) in a group of 21 patients (mean age 61.4 +/- 9.2 y). METHODS: A total of 740 MBq 99mTc-tetrofosmin was administered rapidly into the right cubital vein at rest, and FPRNA was performed using a multicrystal gamma camera. One hour after injection, QGS was performed with a temporal resolution of 10 frames per R-R interval. LVG was performed within 2 wk. RESULTS: The EDV, ESV and LVEF calculated by QGS were highly reproducible (intraobserver, r = 0.99, r = 0.99 and r = 0.99, respectively; interobserver, r = 0.99, r = 0.99 and r = 0.99, respectively; P < 0.01) and were more consistent than those determined by FPRNA (intraobserver, r = 0.97, r = 0.95 and r = 0.93, respectively; interobserver, r = 0.86, r = 0.96 and r = 0.91, respectively; P < 0.01). There was a good correlation between EDV, ESV and LVEF by FPRNA and those by LVG (r = 0.61, r = 0.72 and r = 0.91, respectively; P < 0.01), and there was an excellent correlation between QGS and LVG (r = 0.73, r = 0.83 and r = 0.87, respectively; P < 0.01). The mean EDV by QGS (100 +/- 11.3 mL) was significantly lower than by FPRNA (132 +/- 16.8 mL) or LVG (130 +/- 8.1 mL), and the mean ESV by QGS (53.8 +/- 9.3 mL) was lower than by FPRNA (73.0 +/- 13.3 mL). Ejection fraction values were highest by LVG (57.1% +/- 3.2%), then QGS (51.8% +/- 3.0%) and FPRNA (48.9% +/- 2.4%). CONCLUSION: QGS gave more reproducible results than FPRNA. LV volumes and LVEF calculated by QGS correlated well to those by LVG.     

Validation of left ventricular function from gated single photon computed emission tomography by using a scintillator-photodiode camera: a dynamic myocardial phantom study

A scintillator-photodiode camera is able to acquire single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) images by using a rotating chair system. We validated the left ventricular (LV) parameters of this camera system utilizing a dynamic myocardial phantom. Gated myocardial SPECT of a dynamic myocardial phantom (Hokkaido University type; end diastolic volume (EDV), 143 ml; end systolic volume (ESV), 107 ml; ejection fraction (EF), 25%) was performed with this scintillation camera. LV parameters were calculated using pre-installed software (Mirage Myocardial Perfusion SPECT) (study 1) and the other software (QGS; Cedars-Sinai) (study 2). For comparison, SPECT from a traditional Anger camera were processed by the QGS software (study 3). The estimated volumes were similar among the three studies (EDV, 110+/-8 ml in study 1, 112+/-2 ml in study 2 and 111+/-1 ml in study 3; ESV, 86+/-8 ml in study 1, 93+/-4 ml in study 2 and 91+/-2 ml in study 3). The estimated EFs were 23+/-3%, 17+/-2%, and 18+/-1%, respectively. The calculated volume within each study was underestimated by approximately the same degree. However, each estimated EF value for each study was close to the actual value. The estimated LV function using the scintillator-photodiode camera system may be considered as a suitable alternative to the traditional Anger camera system.     

Reproducibility of Tl-201 and Tc-99m sestamibi gated myocardial perfusion SPECT measurement of myocardial function

BACKGROUND: We compared the reproducibility of thallium 201 and technetium 99m sestamibi (MIBI) gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) measurement of myocardial function using the Germano algorithm (J Nucl Med 1995;36:2138-47). METHODS AND RESULTS: Gated SPECT acquisition was repeated in the same position in 30 patients who received Tl-201 and in 26 who received Tc-99m-MIBI. The quantification of end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), and ejection fraction (EF) on Tl-201 and Tc-99m-MIBI gated SPECT was processed independently with Cedars-Sinai QGS (Quantitative Gated SPECT) software. The reproducibility of the measurement of ventricular function on Tl-201 gated SPECT was compared with that of Tc-99m-MIBI gated SPECT. Correlation between the 2 measurements for volumes and EF was excellent for the repeated gated SPECT studies of Tl-201 (r = 0.928 to 0.986, P <.05) and Tc-99m-MIBI (r = 0.979 to 0.997, P <.05). However, Bland-Altman analysis revealed the 95% limits of agreement (2 SDs) for volumes and EF were narrower by repeated Tc-99m-MIBI gated SPECT (EDV 14.1 mL, ESV 9.4 mL, EF 5.5%) than by repeated Tl-201 gated SPECT (EDV 24.1 mL, ESV 18.6 mL, EF 10.3%). The root-mean-square values of the coefficient of variation for volumes and EF were smaller by repeated Tc-99m-MIBI gated SPECT (EDV 2.1 mL, ESV 2.7 mL, EF 2.3%) than by repeated Tl-201 gated SPECT (EDV 3.2 mL, ESV 3.5 mL, EF 5.2%). CONCLUSIONS: QGS provides an excellent correlation between repeated gated SPECT with Tl-201 and Tc-99m-MIBI. However, Tc-99m-MIBI provides more reproducible volumes and EF than Tl-201. Tc-99m-MIBI gated SPECT is the preferable method for the clinical monitoring of ventricular function.     

The agreement of left ventricular function parameters between 99mTc-tetrofosmin gated myocardial SPECT and gated myocardial MRI

Objective

The aim is to compare and evaluate the agreement of quantification of left ventricular functional parameters obtained by two different methods, ^99mTc-tetrofosmin gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR).

Methods

Ten healthy male volunteers participated. Gated MPS data were acquired using 32 frames, which were also combined into 16- and 8-frame data set for the investigation. Gated CMR data were acquired using 8, 16 and 32-frame for the different sets. All examinations were conducted in resting and at exercise conditions. Quantitative measurements of end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), peak ejection rate (PER), peak filling rate (PFR) and time to peak filling (TTPF) were done for each study, respectively. Finally, we evaluated the concordance of parameters between gated MPS and gated CMR by % difference and Bland?CAltman plot analysis.

Results

LVEF showed favorable concordance in both rest and exercise conditions (% differences were around 10%). PER, PFR and TTPF also showed good concordances in rest conditions, under 32-frame gated collections particularly (% differences were around 10%). In exercise conditions, although the concordances were relatively good, certain variances were noted (% differences were around 20?C25%). Regarding left ventricular volumes, the concordance were worse in both conditions (% differences were around 30?C40%).

Conclusions

In quantifying of left ventricular function parameter, gated CMR provides similar quantitative values comparing with gated MPS except for ventricular volumes in rest conditions. In contrast, there were certain variations except for LVEF in exercised examinations. When we follow patients by the same cardiac parameters with CMR and MPS, using parameters across the two modalities proved to be possible under rest condition. However, it is limited at exercise condition.     

Comparison of two software in gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission tomography, for the measurement of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction, in patients with and without perfusion defects

Emory cardiac toolbox (ECTb) and quantitative gated single photon emission tomography - SPET (QGS) software are the two most often used techniques for automatic calculation of left ventricular volumes (LVV) and ejection fraction (LVEF). Few studies have shown that these software are not interchangeable, however the effect of perfusion defects on performance of these software has not been widely studied. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of QGS and ECTb for the calculation of LVEF, end-systolic volume (ESV) and end-diastolic volume (EDV) in patients with normal and abnormal myocardial perfusion. One hundred and forty-four consecutive patients with suspected coronary artery disease underwent a two-day protocol with dipyridamole stress/rest gated technetium-99m-methoxy isobutyl isonitrile ((99m)Tc-sestamibi) myocardial perfusion (GSPET) (8 gates/cardiac cycles). Rest GSPET scintiscan findings were analyzed using QGS and ECTb. Correlation between the results of QGS and ECTb was greater than 90%. In patients with no perfusion defects, EDV and LVEF using ECTb, were significantly higher than using QGS (P<0.001), whereas no significant difference was noticed in ESV (P=0.741). In patients with perfusion defects, also ECTb yielded significantly higher values for EDV, ESV and LVEF than QGS (P<0.001). In tomograms of patients with perfusion defects, mean differences of EDV and ESV between the two software, were significantly higher than in tomograms of patients without defects (P<0.001), while for LVEF this difference was not significant (P= 0.093). Patients were classified into three subgroups based on the summed rest score (SRS); G1: patients with SRS < or = 3 (n=109), G2: patients with 4 < or = SRS < or = 8 (n=13) and G3: patients with SRS > or = 9 (n=22). One-way ANOVA showed that the mean differences of EDV and ESV values between ECTb and QGS between the subgroups were significant (P<0.001 for both parameters), while no significant difference was noticed between the subgroups, as for the mean difference of LVEF, calculated by the two software (P=0.07). By increasing SRS, the EDV and ESV values were overestimated to a higher level by the ECTb as compared to the QGS software. Linear regression analysis showed that the difference in LVV values, between the two software increased, when SRS also increased (P<0.001). In conclusion, correlation between QGS and ECTb, software was very good both in patients with and without perfusion defects. In patients with perfusion defects, calculated LVEF, ESV and EDV values are higher using ECTb compared to the QGS software. However, the more extensive the perfusion defect was, the greater the difference of LVV between these two software. For the follow up of patients, we suggest the use of a single software either QGS or ECTb, for serial measurements of LV function.     

Evaluation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by gated SPECT and cardiac MRI in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy

Purpose  

The goal of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in the assessment of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic/end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the reference method. Furthermore, software-specific characteristics of Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS), Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTB) and 4D-MSPECT were analysed.     

Assessment of left ventricular function by gated myocardial perfusion and gated blood-pool SPECT: Can we use the same reference database?

The purpose of this study was to compare left ventricular (LV) volume and ejection fraction (LVEF) measurements obtained with electrocardiographic gated single-photon emission computed tomographic (SPECT) myocardial perfusion imaging (GS-MPI) with those obtained with gated SPECT cardiac blood-pool imaging (GS-pool). Fifteen patients underwent GS-MPI with technetium-99m-tetrofosmin and GS-pool with technetium-99m-erythrocyte, within a mean interval of 8 +/- 3 days. Eight patients had suspected dilated cardiomyopathy and seven patients had angiographically significant coronary artery disease. End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and LVEF measurements were estimated from GS-MPI images by means of Cedars-Sinai automatic quantitative program and from GS-pool images by the threshold technique. Mean differences between GS-MPI and GS-pool in EDV, ESV and LVEF measurements were -2.8 +/- 10.5 ml [95% confidence interval (CI): -8.6 +/- 3.0 ml], 2.6 +/- 7.3 ml (CI: -1.4 +/- 6.6 ml) and -2.3 +/- 5.1% (CI: -5.1 +/- 0.6%), respectively. No significant difference in the mean differences from 0 was found for EDV, ESV or LVEF measurements. Bland-Altman plots revealed no trend over the measured LV volumes and LVEF. For all parameters, regression lines approximated lines of identity. The excellent agreement between GS-MPI and GS-pool measurements suggests that, for estimation of LV volumes and LVEF, these two techniques may be used interchangeably and measurements by one method can serve as a reference for the other.     

Ischaemic related transitory left ventricular dysfunction in 201Tl gated SPECT

AIM: To report our data concerning the changes in post-stress and at-rest left ventricular ejection fraction and ventricular volumes in patients with thallium gated SPECT. METHODS: Post-stress and at-rest thallium gated SPECT was performed in 629 consecutive patients; left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular volumes and quantitative perfusion data were obtained. Transitory left ventricular dysfunction was diagnosed when post-stress LVEF did not increase at least 5% from LVEF at-rest. RESULTS: In all patients post-stress LVEF was 64%+/-17 while at-rest LVEF was 66%+/-15 (P=0.6). Post-stress end diastolic volume (EDV) was 142 ml+/-7, at-rest EDV was 141 ml+/-92 (P=0.57), post-stress end systolic volume (ESV) was 54 ml+/-51 and at-rest ESV was 56 ml+/-59 (P=0.38). Data from the perfusion study were used to divide patients into three groups: normal patients (group I), patients with total or partially reversible defects (group II) and patients with fixed defects (group III). In group I and group III patients LVEF at-rest was lower than post-exercise (LVEF 75%+/-11 vs 81%+/-10 (P<0.001) and 57%+/-16 vs 60%+/-18 (P=0.025)), respectively. Patients in group II had a higher at-rest LVEF than post-exercise (LVEF 66%+/-14 vs 64%+/-16 (P=0.003)). While the left ventriuclar volumes in group I and III patients decreased with exercise, group II patients had increased post-stress ESV. CONCLUSIONS: Post-stress and at-rest LVEF are similar when all patients are considered but significant differences appear when patients are divided according to the results of the perfusion study. Normal and fixed defect patients have increased post-exercise LVEF. Patients with reversible defects have decreased LVEF, which is largely due to an increased ESV. Transitory left ventricular dysfunction is related to the presence of reversibility and may benefit from revascularization.