BACKGROUND: We developed a new segmentation algorithm based on the invariance of the Laplacian (IL) to compute volumes and ejection fractions and compared these results with planar analysis and gradients by use of a standard algorithm (QBS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Planar and single photon emission computed tomography blood pool acquisition was performed in 202 patients. Planar left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was used as the gold standard, and single photon emission computed tomography images were processed by both 3-dimensional (3D) methods. Correlations between each 3D algorithm and planar methodology were as follows: r = 0.77 for QBS and r = 0.84 for IL. Mean LVEFs were 32.72% +/- 13.05% for the planar method, 32.32% +/- 15.98% for QBS, and 31.93% +/- 13.44% for IL (P = .16). Bland-Altman analysis closely demonstrated negligible systematic bias for both 3D methods. Standard errors of bias were comparable between methods (9.36% for QBS and 7.44% for IL, P = .48). Linear regression of the Bland-Altman bias revealed a slope significantly different from 0 for the QBS method (0.22 +/- 0.048, P < .0001) but not for IL (-0.032 +/- 0.0044, P = .47). CONCLUSION: The new segmentation algorithm provides comparable results to QBS and planar analysis. However, with QBS, the difference in LVEF was correlated with the magnitude of LVEF, which was not found with the new algorithm.
BACKGROUND: We developed a new segmentation algorithm based on the invariance of the Laplacian (IL) to compute volumes and ejection fractions and compared these results with planar analysis and gradients by use of a standard algorithm (QBS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Planar and single photon emission computed tomography blood pool acquisition was performed in 202 patients. Planar left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was used as the gold standard, and single photon emission computed tomography images were processed by both 3-dimensional (3D) methods. Correlations between each 3D algorithm and planar methodology were as follows: r = 0.77 for QBS and r = 0.84 for IL. Mean LVEFs were 32.72% +/- 13.05% for the planar method, 32.32% +/- 15.98% for QBS, and 31.93% +/- 13.44% for IL (P = .16). Bland-Altman analysis closely demonstrated negligible systematic bias for both 3D methods. Standard errors of bias were comparable between methods (9.36% for QBS and 7.44% for IL, P = .48). Linear regression of the Bland-Altman bias revealed a slope significantly different from 0 for the QBS method (0.22 +/- 0.048, P < .0001) but not for IL (-0.032 +/- 0.0044, P = .47). CONCLUSION: The new segmentation algorithm provides comparable results to QBS and planar analysis. However, with QBS, the difference in LVEF was correlated with the magnitude of LVEF, which was not found with the new algorithm.
Authors: M W Groch; E G DePuey; A C Belzberg; W D Erwin; M Kamran; C A Barnett; R C Hendel; S M Spies; A Ali; R C Marshall Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Mark W Groch; Dale J Schippers; Robert C Marshall; Paul J Groch; William D Erwin Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2002 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Véronique Eder; François Bernis; Marc Drumm; M I Diarra; Françoise Baulieu; Christophe Léger Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: J R Corbett; D E Jansen; S E Lewis; G I Gabliani; P Nicod; N G Filipchuk; G A Redish; M S Akers; C L Wolfe; J S Rellas Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1985-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: R O Bonow; S L Bacharach; M V Green; K M Kent; D R Rosing; L C Lipson; M B Leon; S E Epstein Journal: Circulation Date: 1981-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J B Gill; R H Moore; N Tamaki; D D Miller; M Barlai-Kovach; T Yasuda; C A Boucher; H W Strauss Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1986-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Michel Lalonde; David Birnie; Terrence D Ruddy; Robert A deKemp; Richard W Wassenaar Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2010-04-29 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: François Harel; Vincent Finnerty; Jean Grégoire; Bernard Thibault; François Marcotte; Patricia Ugolini; Paul Khairy Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2010-02-12 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Samaneh Salimian; Bernard Thibault; Vincent Finnerty; Jean Grégoire; François Harel Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Thanh-Thuy Vo Thang; Bernard Thibault; Vincent Finnerty; Matthieu Pelletier-Galarneau; Paul Khairy; Jean Grégoire; François Harel Journal: J Interv Card Electrophysiol Date: 2012-05-15 Impact factor: 1.900