Literature DB >> 16175442

Evaluation of the Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS) software program in the presence of large perfusion defects.

Yves G C J America1, Jeroen J Bax, Petra Dibbets-Schneider, Ernest K J Pauwels, Ernst E Van der Wall.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the reproducibility and operator dependence for the quantitative regional left ventricular functional parameters (LVFP) assessed by Cedars-Sinai's Quantitative automated gated SPECT (QGS) software.
METHODS: The QGS algorithm was reviewed in detail and potential operator dependencies were defined. Series of prototypes were selected, consisting of (a) normal perfusion, (b) perfusion defects in all perfusion regions, (c) perfusion studies of patients with angiographic confirmed normal coronary arteries, proximal (>or=70% stenoses) single and multiple vessel disease, and (d) spurious activity in close proximity. While defining and re-orienting the volume containing the left ventricle, the operator adjusted 8 variables/degrees of freedom (DF). The software was used without further operator interventions. Results were expressed as a coefficient of variation (COV). Separate COV were calculated per distinct DF. A segment was considered not robust when the COV did exceed 20% in a single DF, 15% in at least 2 DF, or 10% in at least 3 DF.
RESULTS: Regional left ventricular EF and volumes showed excellent reproducibility. Normal perfusion and the vessel disease prototypes showed an excellent COV (for all re-orientation steps [33/prototype]) mostly below 5% for LVFP. However, regional wall motion and thickening became less reliable in the presence of large perfusion defects or artifacts.
CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative estimates for regional left ventricular functional data show excellent reproducibility using automated gated SPECT. However, there may be substantial operator dependency in the presence of large defects or spurious activity in close proximity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16175442     DOI: 10.1007/s10554-005-0274-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging        ISSN: 1569-5794            Impact factor:   2.357


  22 in total

Review 1.  Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-01-29       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Assessment of regional myocardial wall motion and thickening by gated 99Tcm-tetrofosmin SPECT: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  F F Wahba; H J Lamb; J J Bax; P Dibbets-Schneider; C D Bavelaar-Croon; A H Zwinderman; E K Pauwels; E E Van Der Wall
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 1.690

3.  Validation of quantitative gated single photon emission computed tomography and an automated scoring system for the assessment of regional left ventricular systolic function.

Authors:  A Hashimoto; T Nakata; T Wakabayashi; M Kyuma; T Takahashi; K Tsuchihashi; K Shimamoto
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 1.690

4.  A realistic 3-D gated cardiac phantom for quality control of gated myocardial perfusion SPET: the Amsterdam gated (AGATE) cardiac phantom.

Authors:  Jacco J N Visser; Ellinor Busemann Sokole; Hein J Verberne; Jan B A Habraken; Huybert J F van de Stadt; Joris E N Jaspers; Morgan Shehata; Paul M Heeman; Berthe L F van Eck-Smit
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Thallium-201 gated single-photon emission tomography for the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and regional wall motion abnormalities in comparison with two-dimensional echocardiography.

Authors:  C Bacher-Stier; S Müller; O Pachinger; S Strolz; H Erler; R Moncayo; M Wenger; E Donnemiller; G Riccabona
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1999-12

Review 6.  An automatic approach to the analysis, quantitation and review of perfusion and function from myocardial perfusion SPECT images.

Authors:  G Germano; P B Kavanagh; D S Berman
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1997-08

7.  Quantitative analysis of regional motion and thickening by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: normal heterogeneity and criteria for abnormality.

Authors:  T Sharir; D S Berman; P B Waechter; J Areeda; P B Kavanagh; J Gerlach; X Kang; G Germano
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Accuracy of the automated assessment of left ventricular function with gated perfusion SPECT in the presence of perfusion defects and left ventricular dysfunction: correlation with equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography and echocardiography.

Authors:  T Chua; L C Yin; T H Thiang; T B Choo; D Z Ping; L Y Leng
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Comparison of automatic quantification software for the measurement of ventricular volume and ejection fraction in gated myocardial perfusion SPECT.

Authors:  D P Lum; M N Coel
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.690

10.  201Tl and 99mTc-MIBI gated SPECT in patients with large perfusion defects and left ventricular dysfunction: comparison with equilibrium radionuclide angiography.

Authors:  A Manrique; M Faraggi; P Véra; D Vilain; R Lebtahi; A Cribier; D Le Guludec
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 10.057

View more
  10 in total

1.  Single injection, double acquisition: a double-edged sword?

Authors:  Ernst E van der Wall; Yves G America; Arthur J Scholte; Jeroen J Bax
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 2.357

2.  Gated SPECT in left bundle branch block: from improved diagnosis to improved treatment.

Authors:  E E van der Wall; J J Bax; J W Jukema; M J Schalij
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Gated SPECT: what's the ideal method to measure LVEF?

Authors:  Sum-Che Man; Ernst E van der Wall; Cees A Swenne
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-09-02       Impact factor: 2.357

4.  Positron emission tomography; viable tool in patients pre-CABG?

Authors:  E E van der Wall; H M Siebelink; A J Scholte; J J Bax
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  Gated SPECT imaging to detect changes in myocardial blood flow during progressive coronary occlusion.

Authors:  Timothy F Christian; Kevin Peters; Bradly Keck; Jill Allen; Thomas Owens; Babul Borah
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2007-08-17       Impact factor: 2.357

6.  The additive prognostic value of perfusion and functional data assessed by quantitative gated SPECT in women.

Authors:  Yves G C J America; Jeroen J Bax; Eric Boersma; Marcel Stokkel; Ernst E van der Wall
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2009-01-20       Impact factor: 5.952

7.  Gated myocardial SPECT imaging; true additional value in AMI?

Authors:  E E van der Wall; A J Scholte; J J Bax
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-06-08       Impact factor: 2.357

8.  Assessment of left ventricular function: visual or quantitative?

Authors:  E E van der Wall; J H C Reiber
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-10-28       Impact factor: 2.357

9.  Assessment of left ventricular volumes; reliable by gated SPECT?

Authors:  E E van derWall; A J H A Scholte; H M Siebelink; J J Bax
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 2.357

10.  CT perfusion angiography; beware of artifacts!

Authors:  E E van der Wall; J D Schuijf; J J Bax; J W Jukema; M J Schalij
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 2.357

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.