Accuracy of radionuclide ventriculography assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with abnormal left ventricles
Accuracy of radionuclide ventriculography assessed by magnetic resonance imaging in patients with abnormal left ventricles
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.nuclcard.2005.04.003
复制
发表时间：
2005-07-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Reichek, N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Akinboboye, O;Nichols, K;Reichek, N
背景。我们比较了门控血池单光子发射计算机断层扫描（GBPS）、平面门控血池成像（planar GBP）和心脏磁共振（CMR）测量左心室异常患者的左室舒张末期容积（EDV）和射血分数（EF）。方法与结果。采用GBPS、平面GBP和CMR测量40例受试者（年龄59±13岁，85%为男性）的左室功能参数。采用计数阈值软件（BP-SPECT）和表面梯度软件（QBS）对GBPS数据进行分析。BP-SPECT、QBS和平面GBP与CMR的一致性范围分别为-5% ~ +18%、-15% ~ +14%和-15% ~ +16%。然而，两种GBPS方法与CMR对LV EDV的一致限度都很宽：BP-SPECT和QBS分别为-118 mL至+55 mL和-143 mL至+22 mL。BP-SPECT、QBS和平面GBP法测定EF的Bland-Altman重现限分别为-9% ~ +8%、-6% ~ +9%和-7% ~ +7%；BP-SPECT和QBS法测定EDV的Bland-Altman重现限分别为-46 mL ~ +48 mL和-31 mL ~ +35 mL。GBPS低电压EF测量值与CMR测量值一致，与平面GBP测量值具有相同的重复性。然而，放射性核素与CMR值的广泛一致性表明，在解释GBPS左室容积结果时必须谨慎，特别是对于左心室明显异常的患者。
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.