Literature DB >> 12084609

Electrocardiogram-gated single-photon emission computed tomography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: a meta-analysis.

John P A Ioannidis1, Thomas A Trikalinos, Peter G Danias.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for assessment of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and ejection fraction (EF) compared with the gold standard of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
BACKGROUND: Several comparisons of ECG-gated SPECT with cardiac MRI have been performed for evaluation of LV volumes and EF, but each has considered few subjects, thus leaving uncertainty about the frequency of discrepancies between the two methods.
METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of data on 164 subjects from nine studies comparing ECG-gated SPECT versus cardiac MRI. Data were pooled in correlation and regression analyses relating ECG-gated SPECT and cardiac MRI measurements. The frequency of discrepancies of at least 30 ml in EDV, 20 ml in ESV and 5% or 10% in EF and concordance for EF < or =40% versus >40% were determined.
RESULTS: There was an overall excellent correlation between ECG-gated SPECT and cardiac MRI for EDV (r = 0.89), ESV (r = 0.92) and EF (r = 0.87). However, rates of discrepancies for individual subjects were considerable (37% [95% confidence interval [CI], 26% to 50%] for at least 30 ml in EDV; 35% [95% CI, 23% to 49%] for at least 20 ml in ESV; 52% [95% CI, 37% to 63%] for at least 5% in EF; and 23% [95% CI, 11% to 42%] for at least 10% in EF). The misclassification rate for the 40% EF cutoff was 11%.
CONCLUSIONS: Electrocardiogram-gated SPECT measurements of EDV, ESV and EF show high correlation with cardiac MRI measurements, but substantial errors may occur in individual patients. Electrocardiogram-gated SPECT offers useful functional information, but cardiac MRI should be used when accurate measurement is required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12084609     DOI: 10.1016/s0735-1097(02)01882-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  39 in total

1.  Validation of 4D-MSPECT and QGS for quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated 99mTc-MIBI SPET: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Claudia S A Lipke; Harald P Kühl; Bernd Nowak; Hans-Juergen Kaiser; Patrick Reinartz; Karl-Christian Koch; Udalrich Buell; Wolfgang M Schaefer
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-01-14       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Comparison of gated single-photon emission computed tomography with magnetic resonance imaging for evaluation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.

Authors:  Petri Sipola; Keijo Peuhkurinen; Esko Vanninen
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-09-28       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 3.  Non-invasive imaging in coronary artery disease including anatomical and functional evaluation of ischaemia and viability assessment.

Authors:  M Pakkal; V Raj; G P McCann
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.039

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

Authors:  Gautam Ramakrishna; Todd D Miller; David O Hodge; Michael K O'Connor; Raymond J Gibbons
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  A historical perspective on measurement of ventricular function with scintigraphic techniques: Part II--Ventricular function with gated techniques for blood pool and perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Kim A Williams
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

6.  EANM/ESC procedural guidelines for myocardial perfusion imaging in nuclear cardiology.

Authors:  B Hesse; K Tägil; A Cuocolo; C Anagnostopoulos; M Bardiés; J Bax; F Bengel; E Busemann Sokole; G Davies; M Dondi; L Edenbrandt; P Franken; A Kjaer; J Knuuti; M Lassmann; M Ljungberg; C Marcassa; P Y Marie; F McKiddie; M O'Connor; E Prvulovich; R Underwood; B van Eck-Smit
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 7.  Cardiac imaging in coronary artery disease: differing modalities.

Authors:  J D Schuijf; L J Shaw; W Wijns; H J Lamb; D Poldermans; A de Roos; E E van der Wall; J J Bax
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 5.994

8.  Noninvasive modalities for the assessment of left ventricular function: all are equal but some are more equal than others.

Authors:  Tiong Keng Lim; Roxy Senior
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Evaluation of left ventricular function: does the imaging technique matter?

Authors:  Leo H B Baur
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 2.357

10.  Segmental and global left ventricular function assessment using gated SPECT with a semiconductor Cadmium Zinc Telluride (CZT) camera: phantom study and clinical validation vs cardiac magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Alban Bailliez; Tanguy Blaire; Frédéric Mouquet; R Legghe; B Etienne; Damien Legallois; Denis Agostini; Alain Manrique
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.