Journal of Nuclear Cardiology

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 233–243 | Cite as

Comparison of interstudy reproducibility of equilibrium electrocardiography-gated SPECT radionuclide angiography versus planar radionuclide angiography for the quantification of global left ventricular function

  • Doumit DaouEmail author
  • Carlos Coaguila
  • Abdel Benada



Electrocardiography-gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) radionuclide angiography (RNA) provides accurate measurement of both left ventric-ular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) and end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes. In this study we studied the interstudy precision and reliability of SPECT RNA as compared with planar RNA for the measurement of global systolic LV function.

Methods and Results

The population included 10 patients with chronic coronary artery disease having 2 sets of acquisitions, each consisting of planar and SPECT RNA. SPECT RNA was processed with SPECT-QBS and SPECT-35%. (For SPECT-35%, a manual segmentation method based on the 35% threshold of the maximum LV cavity activity is used to provide estimates of the number of voxels and the activity included in the LV cavity. The calculated LV number of voxels is then used to calculate LV volume measurement. The LV EF is calculated as the ratio of LV end-diastolic and end-systolic activity.) For LV EF, end-diastolic volume, and end-systolic volume, the interstudy precision, as reflected by the correlation coefficient, coefficient of variability, coefficient of repeatability, and within-subject coefficient of variation, and the interstudy reliability, as reflected by the intraclass correlation coefficient, were best with SPECT-35%, followed by planar RNA and then SPECT-QBS, respectively. The sample size needed to objectify a change in a parameter of LV function is lowest with SPECT-35%, followed by planar RNA and then SPECT-QBS, respectively.


The SPECT-35% processing method provides excellent interstudy precision and reliability for LV function measurement. In this aspect it seems to be better than planar RNA and SPECT-QBS. These results need to be confirmed in a larger patient population.

Key Words

Left ventricle electrocardiography-gated blood pool single photon emission computed tomography ejection fraction volume radionuclide angiography 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Sharir T, Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Lai S, Cohen I, Lewin HC, et al. Incremental prognostic value of post-stress left ventricular ejection fraction and volume by gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 1999; 100:1035–422.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Taniguchi K, Nakano S, Hirose H, Matsuda H, Shirakura R, Sakai K, et al. Preoperative left ventricular function: minimal requirement f or successful late results of valve replacement for aortic regurgitation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987;10:510–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    White HD, Noms RM, Brown MA, Brandt PWT, Whitlock RML, Wild CJ. Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction. Circulation 1987;76:44–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carabello BA, Usher BW, Hendrix GH, Assey ME, Crawford FA, Leman RB. Predictors of outcome for aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic regurgitation and left ventricular dysfunction: a change in the measuring sticks. J Am Coll Cardiol 1987;10:991–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Massardo T, Gal RA, Grenier RP, Schmidt DH, Port SC. Left ventricular volume calculation using a count-based ratio method applied to multigated radionuclide angiography [published erratum appeals in J Nucl Med 1990;31:1449]. J Nucl Med 1990;31:450–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Daou D, Harel F, Helal BO, Fourme T, Colin P, Lebtahi R, et al. Electrocardiographically gated blood-pool SPECT and left ventricular function: comparative value of 3 methods for ejection fraction and volume estimation. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1043–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Kriekinge SD, Berman DS, Germano G. Automatic quantification of left ventricular ejection fraction from gated blood pool SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 1999;6:498–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wright GA, Thackray S, Howey S, Cleland JG. Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated blood-pool SPECT: comparison with planar gated blood-pool imaging and assessment of repeatability in patients with heart failure. J Nucl Med 2003; 44:494–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Véra P, Gardin I, Bok B. Comparative study of three automatic programs of left ventricular ejection fraction evaluation. Nucl Med Commun 1995;16:667–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: measurement error and con-elation coefficients. BMJ 1996;313:41–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zar J. Measures of dispersion and variability. In: Zar J, editor. Biostatistical analysis. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs (NJ): Prentice-Hall; 1984. p. 27–39.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1:307–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Measurement error proportional to the mean [published erratum appears in BMJ 1996;313:744]. BMJ 1996;312:1654.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Measurement error. BMJ 1996;312:1654.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistics notes: measurement error and con-elation coefficients. BMJ 1996;313:41–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bastianello S, Bozzao A, Paolillo A, Giugni E, Gasperini C, Koudriavtseva T, et al. Fast spin-echo and fast fluid-attenuated inversion-recovery versus conventional spin-echo sequences for MR quantification of multiple sclerosis lesions. Am J Neuroradiol 1997;18:699–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bland M. Determination of sample size. In: An introduction to medical statistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2000. p.335–47.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Verani MS, Gaeta J, Leblanc AD, Poliner LR, Phillips L, Lacy JL, et al. Validation of left ventricular volume measurements by radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Med 1985;26:1394–401.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mahmarian JJ, Moye L, Verani MS, Eaton T, Francis M, Pratt CM. Criteria for the accurate interpretation of changes in left ventricular ejection fraction and cardiac volumes as assessed by rest and exercise gated radionuclide angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991;18:112–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Harris PJ, Hanell FE Jr, Lee KL, Behar VS, Rosati RA. Survival in medically treated coronary artery disease. Circulation 1979;60:1259–699.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mock MB, Ringqvist I, Fisher LD, Davis KB, Chaitman BR, Kouchoukos NT, et al. Survival of medically treated patients in the coronary artery surgery study (CASS) registry. Circulation 1982; 66:562–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cerqueira MD, Maynard C, Ritchie JL, Davis KB, Kennedy JW. Long-term survival in 618 patients from the Western Washington streptokinase in myocardial infarction trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1452–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miller TD, Christian TF, Hopfenspirger MR, Hodge DO, Gersh BJ, Gibbons RJ. Infarct size after acute myocardial infarction measured by quantitative tomography Tc-99m sestamibi imaging predicts subsequent mortality. Circulation 1995;92:334–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zaret BL, Wackers FJT, Terrin ML, Forman SA, Williams DO, Knatterud GL, et al. Value of radionuclide rest and exercise left ventricular ejection fraction in assessing survival of patients after thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: results of Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) phase II study. The TIMI Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995;26:73–99.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Volpi A, De Vita C, Franzosi MG, Geraci E, Maggioni AP, Mauri F, Negri E, et al. Determinants of 6-month mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction after thrombolysis: results of the GISSI-2 Data Base. The Ad hoc Working Group of the Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravivienza nell’Infarto Miocardico (GISSI)-2 Data Base. Circulation 1993;88:416–29.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Groch MW, Depuey G, Beizberg C, Erwin WD, Karman M, Bamett CA, et al. Planar imaging versus gated blood-pool SPECT for the assessment of ventricular performance: a multicenter study. J Nucl Med 2001;42:1773–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mariano-Goulart D, Piot C, Boudousq V, Raczka F, Comte F, Eberle MC, et al. Routine measurements of left and right ventricular output by gated blood pool emission tomography in comparison with thermodilution measurements: a preliminary study. Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28:506–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vanhove C, Franken PR, Defrise M, Momen A, Everaert H, Bossuyt A. Automatic determination of left ventricular ejection fraction from gated blood pool tomography. J Nucl Med 2001;42:307–100.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nichols K, Saouaf R, Abaneh AA, Barst RJ, Rosenbaum MS, Groch MW, et al. Validation of SPECT equilibrium radionuclide angiographic right ventricular parameters by cardiac MRI. J Nucl Cardiol 2002;9:153–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Streiner DL, Norman GR. Reliability. In: Streiner DL, Norman GR, editors. Health and measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995. p. 104–27.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Fleiss JL, editor. Sample size determination. In: The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York: John Wiley; 1985. p.:699–704.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bland M. Comparing within-subject variances in a study to compare two methods of measurement. Available from: URL: Accessed Sept 1, 2005.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Nuclear Cardiology 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Nuclear MedicineLariboisière University Hospital, AP-HPParisFrance

Personalised recommendations