title: Evaluation of left and right ventricular functional parameters with automatic edge detection program of ECG gated blood SPET.
abstract: An analysis program for ECG gated, blood pool, single photon emission tomography (SPET GBP) is available. This program permits the automatic evaluation of left and right ventricular function, but its reliability has not been thoroughly assessed. The objective of this investigation was to examine the reliability of the parameters derived from SPET GBP. Fifty-three patients who had undergone both SPET GBP and planar, ECG gated, blood pool scintigraphy (planar GBP) were enrolled in the study. Planar GBP was performed with a single-headed gamma camera. From a left anterior oblique projection, data were acquired at 24 frames/cardiac cycle with ECG gating during the equilibrium state. SPET GBP was carried out utilizing a triple-headed gamma camera, with 60 projection views over 360 degrees, with 60 s per view, in 16 frames/cardiac cycle. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) were calculated by using the analysis program. The reproducibility of these values and the correlation between SPET and planar GBP were assessed. To evaluate the effect of cut-off frequencies of a Butterworth filter, six different cut-off frequencies (order=8, 0.3-1.0 Nyquist) were tested with data obtained from 12 patients. The reproducibility of LVEF by SPET GBP was satisfactory (intra-observer, r=0.95; inter-observer, r=0.96), whereas reproducibility of RVEF by SPET GBP was fair (intra-observer, r=0.83; inter-observer, r=0.83). LVEF with SPET GBP was well correlated (y=1.1x+6.62, r=0.85, P<0.01) with LVEF readings of planar GBP. However, LVEF with SPET GBP was overestimated (mean difference of 12) in comparison with that of planar GBP. The RVEF derived from SPET GBP showed poor correlation (y=0.52x+33, r=0.53, P<0.01) with planar GBP. No significant effect of cut-off frequencies of Butterworth filters was evident in the calculation of LVEF and RVEF (P=0.48 and 0.67) with SPET GBP. It is concluded that SPET GBP with QBS is useful for the evaluation of LVEF. However, measurement of the RVEF showed lower reproducibility compared with measurement of the LVEF.
authors.affiliation: Department of 1Biotracer Medicine, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kanazawa, Japan. higuchi@med.kanazawa-u.ac.jp
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Higuchi
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Taki
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Nakajima
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Kinuya
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Ikeda
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Namura
authors.forename: N
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Tonami
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D015637:Gated Blood-Pool Imaging / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D015588:Observer Variation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013318:Stroke Volume; D018487:Ventricular Dysfunction, Left / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D018497:Ventricular Dysfunction, Right / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*