Literature DB >> 28050861

Sources of variability in the measurement of perfusion defect size using commercially available software programs: Are there gender differences?

Sameer Ather1,2, Ami E Iskandrian3, Fadi G Hage3,4.   

Abstract

We recently showed that Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS), Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb) and 4-Dimension-Myocardial SPECT (4DM) yielded discordant results in the assessment of perfusion defect size (PDS) in patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease. In this report, we examined the sources of variability in the measurement of PDS using ECTb (VarECTb), 4DM (Var4DM) and QPS (VarQPS) and found that gender is a source of variability in the assessment of PDS. In 120 patients, VarECTb was lower in men, compared with women, whereas Var4DM and VarQPS were similar between both genders. Among men, VarECTb was lowest, compared with VarQPS and Var4DM, whereas, VarECTb, VarQPS, and Var4DM were not different among women. Future studies should account for gender differences when comparing the 3 software programs.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Myocardial perfusion imaging; perfusion defect size; single-photon emission computed tomography

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28050861     DOI: 10.1007/s12350-016-0679-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol        ISSN: 1071-3581            Impact factor:   5.952


  3 in total

1.  Call for a standard unit of defect size.

Authors:  Frans J T Wackers
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Comparison of three commercially available softwares for measuring left ventricular perfusion and function by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Sameer Ather; Fahad Iqbal; John Gulotta; Wael Aljaroudi; Jaekyeong Heo; Ami E Iskandrian; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Quantitative myocardial-perfusion SPECT: comparison of three state-of-the-art software packages.

Authors:  Arik Wolak; Piotr J Slomka; Mathews B Fish; Santiago Lorenzo; Wanda Acampa; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2007-10-29       Impact factor: 5.952

  3 in total
  2 in total

Review 1.  Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology in 2017. Part 2 of 2: Myocardial perfusion imaging.

Authors:  Fadi G Hage; Wael A AlJaroudi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-04-16       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 2.  Review of cardiovascular imaging in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology 2020: positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance.

Authors:  Wael A AlJaroudi; Fadi G Hage
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 5.952

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.