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.     

Accuracy of ventricular volume and ejection fraction measured by gated myocardial SPECT: comparison of 4 software programs.

Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT has been used to calculate ejection fraction (EF) and end-diastolic volume (EDV) and has correlated well with conventional methods. However, the comparative accuracy of and correlations across various types of gated SPECT software are not well understood. METHODS: Mathematic phantoms of cylindric-hemispheric hybrid models, ranging in volume from 34 to 266 mL, were generated. The clinical cases consisted of 30 patients who participated in a radionuclide angiography and gated blood-pool (GBP) study in addition to undergoing (99m)Tc-sestamibi gated SPECT. Four kinds of software, Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS), the Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECT), 4D-MSPECT, and Perfusion and Functional Analysis for Gated SPECT (pFAST) were used to compute EF and EDV, and the results were analyzed by multiple comparisons tests. Patients were classified into 4 groups (i.e., no defect, small defect, large defect, and small heart) so that factors affecting variation could be analyzed. RESULTS: In mathematic models > or = 74 mL, volume error was within +/-15%, whereas for a small volume (34 mL), QGS and 4D-MSPECT underestimated the volume and pFAST overestimated it. The respective intra- and interobserver reproducibility of the results was good for QGS (r = 0.99 and 1.00), ECT (r = 0.98 and 0.98), and 4D-MSPECT (r = 0.98 and 0.98) and fair for pFAST (r = 0.88 and 0.85). The correlation coefficient for EF between gated SPECT and the GBP study was 0.82, 0.78, 0.69, and 0.84 for QGS, ECT, 4D-MSPECT, and pFAST, respectively. The correlation coefficient for EDV between gated SPECT and the GBP study was 0.88, 0.89, 0.85, and 0.90, respectively. Although good correlation was observed among the 4 software packages, QGS, ECT, and 4D-MSPECT overestimated EF in patients with small hearts, and pFAST overestimated the true volume in patients with large perfusion defects. Correlation coefficients among the 4 kinds of software were 0.80-0.95 for EF and 0.89-0.98 for EDV. CONCLUSION: All 4 software programs showed good correlation between EF or EDV and the GBP study. Good correlation was observed also between each pair of quantification methods. However, because each method has unique characteristics that depend on its specific algorithm and thus behaves differently in the various patient subgroups, the methods should not be used interchangeably.     

Accuracy of radionuclide ventriculography assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with abnormal left ventricles

BACKGROUND: We compared gated blood pool single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) (GBPS), planar gated blood pool imaging (planar GBP), and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) measurements of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume (EDV) and ejection fraction (EF) in patients with abnormal left ventricles. METHODS AND RESULTS: LV functional parameters were measured for 40 subjects (age, 59 +/- 13 years; 85% male) by GBPS, planar GBP, and CMR. GBPS data were analyzed by use of count-threshold software (BP-SPECT) and surface gradient software (QBS). Limits of agreement with CMR for EF were -5% to +18%, -15% to +14%, and -15% to +16% for BP-SPECT, QBS, and planar GBP, respectively. However, limits of agreement with CMR for LV EDV were wide by both GBPS methods: -118 mL to +55 mL and -143 mL to +22 mL for BP-SPECT and QBS, respectively. Bland-Altman reproducibility limits for EF were -9% to +8%, -6% to +9%, and -7% to +7% by BP-SPECT, QBS, and planar GBP, respectively, and those for EDV were -46 mL to +48 mL and -31 mL to +35 mL by BP-SPECT and QBS, respectively. CONCLUSION: GBPS LV EF measurements agree with measurements by CMR and are as reproducible as planar GBP measurements. However, wide limits of agreement of radionuclide versus CMR values suggest that caution must be applied in interpreting GBPS LV volume results, especially for patients with markedly abnormal left ventricles.     

Evaluation of left ventricular endocardial volumes and ejection fractions computed from gated perfusion SPECT with magnetic resonance imaging: Comparison of two methods

BACKGROUND: Two methods of computing left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction (EF) from 8-frame gated perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were compared with each other and with magnetic resonance (MR) imaging. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-five subjects underwent 8-frame gated dual-isotope SPECT imaging and 12- to 16-frame gated MR imaging. Endocardial boundaries on short-axis MR images were hand traced by experts blinded to any SPECT results. Volumes and EF were computed with the use of Simpson's rule. SPECT images were analyzed for the same functional variables with the use of 2 automatic programs, Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS) and the Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb). The mean difference between MR and SPECT EF was 0.008 for ECTb and 0.08 for QGS. QGS showed a slight trend toward higher correlation for EF (r = 0.72, SE of the estimate = 0.08) than ECTb (r = 0.70, SE of the estimate = 0.09). For both SPECT methods, left ventricular volumes were similarly correlated with MR, although SPECT volumes were higher than MR values by approximately 30%. CONCLUSIONS: QGS and ECTb values of cardiac function computed from 8-frame gated perfusion SPECT correlate very well with each other and correlate well with MR. Averaged over all subjects, ECTb measurements of EF are not significantly different from MR values but QGS significantly underestimates the MR values.     

Evaluation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT versus cardiac MRI

It is stated that cardiac MRI imaging can provide accurate estimation of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT for assessment of LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and EF, using cardiac MRI as the reference methods/(methodology). Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT images were analyzed with two different quantification software, QGS and 4D-MSPECT. Thirty-four consecutive patients were studied. Myocardial perfusion SPECT and cardiac MRI had excellent intra/interobserver reproducibility. Correlation between the results of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and cardiac MRI were high for EDV and EF. However, ESV and EDV were significantly underestimated by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT compared to cardiac MRI. Moreover, gated myocardial perfusion SPECT overestimated EF for small heart. One reason for the difference in volumes and EF is the delineation of the endocardial border. Cardiac MRI has higher spatial resolution. We should understand the differences of volumes and EF as determined by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and cardiac MRI.     

Left ventricular systolic/diastolic function evaluated by quantitative ECG-gated SPECT: comparison with echocardiography and plasma BNP analysis

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the left ventricular (LV) functional parameters calculated using quantitative electrocardiography (ECG)-gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (QGS). In addition to LV systolic parameters, diastolic parameters were compared with those by ultrasound echocardiography (UCG) and also with plasma B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) concentrations. METHODS: We examined 46 patients with various forms of heart disease. By the QGS data with 16 framing data acquisition using technetium (Tc)-99m methoxyisobutylisonitrile (MIBI) perfusion, we calculated the following parameters: LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), peak filling rate (PFR), filling rate during the first third of the filling time (1/3FR) and first third filling fraction (1/3FF). By UCG, we measured mitral early to atrial (E/A) wave velocity ratio and pulmonary venous inflow systolic/diastolic (S/D) ratio as diastolic functional parameters. Plasma BNP concentrations were also measured. RESULTS: There was a significant correlation between LVEDV, ESV and EF measured by QGS and UCG (EDV, r = 0.71, p < 0.001; ESV, r = 0.82, p < 0.001; EF, r = 0.75, p < 0.001). The PFR, 1/3FR and 1/3FF obtained by QGS correlated positively with E/A ratio (PFR, r = 0.54, p < 0.001; 1/3FR, r = 0.61, p < 0.001; 1/3FF, r = 0.42, p < 0.01) and negatively with S/D ratio (PFR, r = -0.40, p < 0.01; 1/3FR, r = -0.38, p < 0.05; 1/3FF, r = -0.39, p < 0.01) obtained by UCG. Plasma BNP concentrations in EF < 50% patients were greater than those in EF > or = 50% patients (335.2 +/- 60.2 vs. 101.2 +/- 41.3 pg/ml, p < 0.01, both n = 17). Plasma BNP levels were also compared between higher and lower 1/3FF patients matched for LVEF. Plasma BNP concentrations in 1/3FF < 35% patients were significantly greater than those in 1/3FF > or = 35% patients (312.9 +/- 62.5 vs. 120.5 +/- 32.8 pg/ml, p < 0.05, both n = 14). CONCLUSIONS: The degree of LV systolic and diastolic dysfunctions evaluated by QGS correlated with that by UCG or BNP. The QGS functional parameters offer useful information regarding cardiac failure.     

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.     

Measurement of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by quantitative gated SPET,contrast ventriculography and magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis

All previous validation studies of quantitative gated single-photon emission tomography (QGS) have examined relatively few patients, and the accuracy of QGS thus remains uncertain. We performed a meta-analysis of data from 301 participants in ten studies that compared QGS using technetium-99m-labelled tracers with contrast left ventriculography (LVG), and from 112 participants in six studies that compared QGS with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Linear regression and Bland-Altman analyses were used to evaluate pooled data from individuals across the studies. The correlation between QGS and LVG for end-diastolic volume (EDV) (r=0.81, SEE=27 ml), end-systolic volume (ESV) (r=0.83, SEE=18 ml) and ejection fraction (EF) (r=0.79, SEE=8.3%) was good, as was that between QGS and MRI for EDV (r=0.87, SEE=34 ml), ESV (r=0.89, SEE=27 ml) and EF (r=0.88, SEE=7.2%). However, Bland-Altman plots indicated that LVG minus QGS differences for EDV generated a systematic and random error of 32+/-58 ml (mean+/-2SD), and that MRI minus QGS generated an error of 13+/-73 ml. In the subgroup of patients in whom ECG gating was set at eight intervals, QGS significantly underestimated EF by 7.6%+/-17.4% (mean+/-2SD) compared with LVG and by 6.3%+/-14.6% compared with MRI; no such underestimation was observed in the subgroup in whom ECG gating was set at 16 intervals. We conclude that in patients with ECG gating set at eight intervals, QGS systematically underestimates LV volumes and EF compared with both LVG and MRI. Since QGS also shows considerable variations around the systematic deviations, there remains uncertainty over whether an individual value determined with QGS approximates the true LV volumes and EF.     

Gated SPECT findings revealing diastolic dysfunction in acute hypothyroidism

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess left ventricular (LV) function by gated SPECT in acute hypothyroidism. METHODS: Thirty-eight acute hypothyroid patients without any cardiac disease and 40 healthy controls underwent gated SPECT at rest. Fourteen patients had a second examination during thyroxine replacement therapy. Gated SPECT was performed using Tc-99m sestamibi with 16 frames per cardiac cycle. The LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), peak ejection rate (PER), peak filling rate (PFR), and time to peak filling (TTPF) were measured by quantitative gated SPECT (QGS). Systolic wall thickening/motion was determined in 5 myocardial segments. RESULTS: Hypothyroid patients exhibited a decrease in PFR (222 +/- 52 EDV/s) and prolongation of TTPF (194 +/- 32 msec) as compared with controls (247 +/- 41 EDV/s and 179 +/- 17 msec, respectively; P < 0.05). During thyroxine therapy, the mean values for EDV (74 +/- 21 mL) and PFR (265 +/- 64 EDV/s) increased significantly in 14 follow-up patients (pretreatment values 67 +/- 18 mL and 219 +/- 50 EDV/s, respectively; P < 0.05). A significant difference was detected in the mean TTPF between the thyroxine group and the controls (195 +/- 35 msec vs 179 +/- 17 msec; P < 0.05). No significant differences were found in wall thickening and motion values (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Gated SPECT findings revealed diastolic dysfunction as indicated by a decrease in PFR and a prolongation in TTPF in patients with acute hypothyroidism.     

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.     

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.     

Normal limits for left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes estimated with gated myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with normal exercise test results: Influence of tracer, gender, and acquisition camera

BACKGROUND: Myocardial imaging with tracers such as technetium-99m sestamibi or thallium-201 is extensively used as a means of measuring myocardial perfusion. With gated acquisition, these tracers can also be used as a means of measuring left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and end diastolic and end systolic volumes (EDV and ESV, respectively). The objective of this study was to determine the normal range of EF, EDV, and ESV and to evaluate differences caused by either the tracer used, the gender of the patient, or the acquisition camera used. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1513 consecutive patients (mean age, 60+/-12 years [SD]) who had normal results on Bruce exercise tests had either Tc-99m sestamibi (n = 884) or Tl-201 (n = 629) injected at peak stress. Although all patients were referred for the evaluation of chest pain or dyspnea and many had cardiac risk factors, all had normal exercise capacity corrected for age, no electrocardiographic signs of ischemia, normal results on perfusion scans, and normal wall motion determined by means of quantitated gated single photon emission computed tomography (QGS). Scans were acquired on 1 of 3 different cameras. The mean EF for all patients who had gated Tc-99m sestamibi scans was 63% +/- 9%, not different from patients who had gated Tl-201 scans (63% +/- 9%). However, when the gender of the patient was considered, the mean EF for women was 66% +/- 8% with Tc-99m sestamibi (n = 519), higher than the mean EF for men (58% +/- 8%, n = 365, P<.0001). Similarly, the mean EF for women studied with Tl-201 (67% +/- 8%, n = 326) was higher than that of men (59% +/- 7%, n = 303,P<.0001). Patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 153) had a slightly reduced EF (62% +/- 10%, P<.001). In a subset of 240 patients, 140 patients studied with Tc-99m sestamibi and 100 studied with Tl-201, the EDV and ESV for women (n = 124) was estimated by means of QGS to be lower (57 +/- 17 mL and 19 +/- 11 mL, respectively) than those for men (74 +/- 22 mL-and 29 +/- 13 mL, respectively; n = 116; P<.001 for each comparison). No clinically significant differences in EF or volumes were noted based on tracers used or acquisition camera. For patients with normal results on exercise treadmill tests and perfusion imaging, the lower limit of normal for EF with gated perfusion imaging with QGS was 50% for women and 43% for men. For EDV and ESV, the upper limit of normal was 91 mL and 40 mL, respectively, for women and 119 mL and 55 mL, respectively, for men. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences related to either tracer or acquisition camera used were noted for EF, suggesting equivalency for clinical trials for patients with normal results on exercise tests. However, EF, EDV, and ESV determined by means of gated perfusion imaging need to be corrected for gender.     

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.     

Performance of OSEM and depth-dependent resolution recovery algorithms for the evaluation of global left ventricular function in 201Tl gated myocardial perfusion SPECT.

It is unknown whether the use of ordered-subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) and depth-dependent resolution recovery (RR) will increase the accuracy of (201)Tl electrocardiogram-gated SPECT (GSPECT) for the measurement of global left ventricular (LV) function. METHODS: Fifty-six patients having both rest (201)Tl GSPECT and planar equilibrium radionuclide angiography (planar(RNA)) on the same day were studied. Twenty-nine patients also had LV conventional contrast angiography (Rx). LV ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), and end-systolic volume (ESV) were calculated with the quantitative gated SPECT software (QGS) using 4 different processing methods: filtered backprojection (FBP), OSEM, RR + FBP, and RR + OSEM. LVEF calculated with planar(RNA) and LV EDV and ESV calculated with Rx were considered gold standards. LVEF and volumes provided with the GSPECT methods were compared with the gold standard methods. RESULTS: LVEF calculated with GSPECT methods (FBP, OSEM, RR + FBP, and RR + OSEM) were similar (not statistically significant) and correlated well with planar(RNA). On Bland-Altman analysis, the mean +/- SD of absolute difference in LVEF with GSPECT FBP, OSEM, RR + FBP, and RR + OSEM methods versus planar(RNA) were similar, with relatively large limits of agreement. LV volumes calculated with the 4 GSPECT methods were significantly lower but correlated well with Rx LV volumes. LV volumes calculated with FBP and OSEM were lower than those calculated with RR + FBP and RR + OSEM (P < 0.01). On Bland-Altman analysis, the mean +/- SD of absolute difference in LV volumes with FBP, OSEM, RR + FBP, and RR + OSEM versus Rx was, respectively, 56 +/- 45 mL (P < 0.01 vs. the other 3 methods), 57 +/- 45 mL (P < 0.01 vs. the other 3 methods), 43 +/- 48 mL, and 46 +/- 47 mL, with correspondingly large limits of agreement. The variance of random error did not differ between FBP, OSEM, RR + FBP, and RR + OSEM for either LVEF or volumes. CONCLUSION: OSEM and FBP presented similar accuracy for LVEF and volume measured with the QGS software. Their combination with depth-dependent RR provided similar LVEF but more accurate LV volumes.     

Mutidetector-row CT and quantitative gated SPECT for the assessment of left ventricular function in small hearts: the cardiac physical phantom study using a combined SPECT/CT system

The aim of this study was to compare results of left ventricular (LV) function obtained by quantitative gated single-photon emission tomography (QGS) and multidetector-row spiral computed tomography (MDCT) with reference parameters using an electrocardiogram-gated cardiac physical phantom. The phantom study was performed using a combined SPECT/CT system. Flexible membranes formed the inner and outer walls of the simulated LV. The stroke volume was adjusted (45 mL or 58 mL) and the fixed 42-mL end-systolic volume (ESV) produced two different volume combinations. The LV function parameters were estimated by means of MDCT and QGS. Differences in true and measured volumes were compared among CT with a reconstructed image thickness of 2.5 mm and 5.0 mm and QGS volumetric values. Each scan was repeated three-times. The estimation of LV volumes using both QGS and MDCT analyses were reproducible very well. QGS overestimated ejection fraction (EF) by approximately 20%; MDCT volumetry overestimated EF by approximately 5% in each volume setting. The differences in true and measured values for EF and ESV obtained with QGS were significantly greater than obtained with MDCT. Conclusion: MDCT provides a reliable estimation of functional LV parameters, whereas QGS tends to significantly overestimate the EF in small hearts.     

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.     

Day-to-day variability of global left ventricular functional and perfusional measurements by quantitative gated SPECT using Tc-99m tetrofosmin in patients with heart failure due to coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND: Although myocardial gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is routinely used for functional measurements in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and heart failure, day-to-day variability of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular (LV) volumes, and global perfusion scoring has not yet been investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 20 consecutive patients with CAD and an LVEF lower than 40% who routinely underwent a resting tetrofosmin gated SPECT study, we performed an additional gated SPECT study at rest 1 to 5 days later under the same circumstances. LV volumes and LVEF were calculated from the gated SPECT data by commercially available software (QGS). Myocardial perfusion was scored visually by use of a 20-segment, 5-point scoring method. For global LV function and perfusion, agreement between data was investigated by use of Bland-Altman plotting. The 95% limits of agreement found by Bland-Altman analysis were -0.9% +/- 6.0% for LVEF, 3 +/- 20 mL for LV end-diastolic volume, and 4 +/- 20 mL for LV end-systolic volume. CONCLUSION: In CAD patients with an LVEF lower than 40%, day-to-day variability of measurements of global myocardial function and perfusion is quite similar to interobserver and intraobserver variability. Day-to-day variability of global LV functional parameters obtained by gated cardiac SPECT is fairly small, which indicates that myocardial gated SPECT can be used in daily clinical practice to determine changes in global LV function and perfusion over time in patients with diminished LV function.     

Differences in left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes measured at rest and poststress by gated sestamibi SPECT

Background  Some studies suggested that the poststress left ventricle ejection fraction (LV EF) is lower than rest LV EF in patients with stress-induced ischemia. Methods and Results  By using a 2-day protocol and 30 mCi Tc-99m sestamibi, LV EF, end-systolic volume (ESV), and end-diastolic volume (EDV) were measured with gated SPECT. Of 99 eligible patients, 91 had technically adequate studies. Poststress LV EF minus rest LV EF was defined as ΔLV EF. ΔEDV and ΔESV were similarly defined. Rest and poststress LV EF (r = 0.89), EDV (r = 0.78), and ESV (r = 0.93) were highly correlated (P <.001). Rest LV EF, EDV, and ESV were not significantly different between patients with and without stress-induced ischemia. ΔLV EF was significantly lower in patients with stress-induced ischemia (-3.5% ± 4.5% vs -1.1% ± 4.7%, P ± .02). Mean LV EF poststress in ischemic patients was 55.0% ± 10.5% vs 61.2% ± 10.0% in nonischemic patients (P = .008). However, only 1 patient (3%) with ischemia had ΔLV EF that exceeded the 95% confidence limit of ΔLV EF for normal patients. Ischemia was significantly associated with increased ΔEDV and ΔESV (P <.01). Conclusions  Stress-induced ischemia is associated with poststress reduction in LV EF and increased poststress EDV and ESV. However, the effect of ischemia on the difference between poststress and rest EF measurements is modest and rarely exceeds the confidence limits in normal patients undergoing 2-day protocols. In most patients, poststress LV EF is an accurate reflection of rest LV EF.     

Assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction by four different methods using 99mTc tetrofosmin gated SPECT in patients with small hearts: correlation with gated blood pool

AIM: To compare the currently available gated SPECT software programs, quantitative gated SPECT (QGS), Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb), Left Ventricular Global Thickening Fraction (LVGTF), and the recently developed Layer of Maximum Count (LMC) method with equilibrium Gated Blood Pool (GBP) scintigraphy in calculating the ejection fraction in patients with small hearts. METHODS: Twenty patients with small hearts (end diastolic volume <85 ml) were collected for the study. Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and planar GBP were performed for all patients. The four methods QGS, ECTb, and LVGTF and LMC were used for volumes estimation and ejection fraction calculation. RESULTS: ANOVA analysis revealed significant differences among the methods in ejection fraction estimation (P<0.0001). The mean ejection fraction by GBP was significantly overestimated by QGS and ECTb and LVGTF (P<0.0001, P<0.0001 and P=0.006, respectively). The mean ejection fraction by GBP was not significantly different from that by the LMC method (P=0.213). Ejection fraction measurements by QGS and ECTb yielded moderate correlation with GBP values (r=0.588, P=0.006; and r=0.564, P=0.010, respectively). The ejection fraction by the LMC method was marginally correlated but LVGTF showed a non-significant correlation with GBP (r=0.438, P=0.053; and r=0.155, P=0.515, respectively). Agreement analysis for ejection fraction estimation by QGS and ECTb demonstrated a non-significant correlation between the difference and the mean. The LMC method showed a non-significant trend to decrease the difference with GBP as the mean increased. However, the LVGTF method significantly increased the difference as the mean increased. CONCLUSION: The currently available gated SPECT methods have moderate to poor correlations in addition to wide agreement limits with gated blood pool studies in patients with small hearts. Improvement of these methods to achieve better results in such patients is recommended. The newly developed LMC method yielded better results in the group with small hearts but with low interchangeability with GBP studies.     

Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT and new software for endocardial and epicardial border delineation

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to quantify left ventricular function and mass derived from retrospectively ECG-gated 16-MDCT coronary angiography data sets using a new analysis software based on automatic contour detection in comparison to corresponding standard of reference measurements acquired with MRI. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Multiplanar reformations in the short-axis orientation were calculated from axial contrast-enhanced CT images in 18 patients (men, 15; women, three; age range, 38-70 years; mean, 57.4 +/- 10.2 [SD] years) who were referred for CT coronary angiography. End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), and left ventricular mass (LVM) were analyzed with a recently developed imaging software using an automated contour detection algorithm of left ventricular endo- and epicardial contours and by manual tracing. The data were compared with similar measurements on MRI as the standard of reference. RESULTS: EDV, ESV, EF, and LVM derived from an automated contour detection algorithm were not statistically significantly different from manual tracing (CT(auto) vs CT(manual): EDV = 137.1 +/- 45.7 mL vs 134.2 +/- 39.9 mL, ESV = 58.8 +/- 34.2 mL vs 58.1 +/-30.1 mL, EF = 59.2% +/- 13.7% vs 58.1% +/- 12.0%, LVM = 130.9 +/- 29.1 g vs 133.7 +/- 33.2 g; p > 0.05). However, EDV (118.7 +/- 43.6 mL), ESV (50.1 +/- 33.5 mL), and LVM (142.8 +/-38.4 g) as calculated on MR data sets were statistically significantly different from those calculated on CT (p < 0.05), whereas MRI-based EF (59.9% +/- 14.4%) did not differ statistically significantly from those based on both CT algorithms (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Automatic and manual analysis of data acquired during CT coronary angiography using a 16-MDCT scanner allows a reliable assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and a rough estimation of left ventricular volumes and mass.