Comparison of left ventricular functional parameters obtained from three different commercial automated software cardiac quantification program packages and their intraobserver reproducibility
ECG-gated myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS) can be used to determine several cardiac functional parameters (e.g., left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), and end-systolic volume (ESV)). In this study, we aimed to compare these cardiac functional parameters calculated by the following cardiac quantification programs: Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb), Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS), and Myometrix. We also evaluated reproducibility of the cardiac programs.
Fifty-seven patients (27 male, 30 female) at Elazig Research and Training Hospital from 2008 to 2009 were included in this study. In all patients, 99mTc-MIBI ECG-Gated (8-bin frame mode) myocardial perfusion scintigraphies were performed. By using 3 different cardiac quantification programs (ECTb, QGS, and Myometrix); LVEF, EDV, and ESV were calculated. The same raw data of MPS images were reprocessed at different time periods, and these 3 parameters were recalculated. LVEF, EDV, and ESV yielded by 3 different programs were compared for interprogram variability assessment, and parameters calculated at two different time periods were compared to evaluate intraprogram reproducibility.
There were statistically significant differences between ECTb, QGS, and Myometrix programs for LVEF, EDV, and ESV (p < 0.001). There was also a statistically significant correlation between LVEF and EDV (p < 0.001, r = 0.546; p < 0.001, r = 0.45, respectively), but no statistically significant correlation was present between the ESV values (p > 0.05, r = 0.09). Statistically significant differences were not found between the values of LVEF, EDV, and ESV obtained from the first and second reconstruction analysis of 3 cardiac quantification programs.
Different MPS cardiac software programs give variable (but correlated) LVEF and left ventricular volumetric measures. Those obtained from different cardiac softwares cannot be used interchangeably. Our findings have shown that ECTb, QGS, and Myometrix programs are reproducible, with respect to LVEF, EDV, and ESV.
KeywordsCardiac gated SPECT ECTb QGS Myometrix
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no financial relationship with any organization related to the research, and no conflicts of interest.
- 5.Lipke CS, Kuhl HP, Nowak B, Kaiser HJ, Reinartz P, Koch KC, et al. Validation of 4D-MSPECT and QGS for quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated 99mTc-MIBI SPET: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:482–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Chua T, Yin LC, Thiang TH, Choo TB, Ping DZ, Leng LY. Accuracy of the automated assessment of left ventricular function with gated perfusion SPECT in the presence of perfusion defects and left ventricular dysfunction: correlation with equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography and echocardiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2000;7:301–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Faber TL, Vansant JP, Pettigrew RI, Galt JR, Blais M, Chatzimavroudis G, et al. Evaluation of left ventricular endocardial volumes and ejection fractions computed from gated perfusion SPECT with magnetic resonance imaging: comparison of two methods. J Nucl Cardiol. 2001;8:645–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.van der Veen BJ, Scholte AJ, Dibbets-Schneider P, Stokkel MP. The consequences of a new software package for the quantification of gated-SPECT myocardial perfusion studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010. doi: 10.1007/s00259-010-1465-6.
- 14.Hedeer F, Palmer J, Arheden H, Ugander M. Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT underestimates left ventricular volumes and shows high variability compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging—a comparison of four different commercial automated software packages. BMC Med Imaging. 2010. doi: 10.1186/1471-2342-10-10.
- 15.Hutyra M, Skala T, Kaminek M, Zapletalova J. Comparison of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction assessment by two-dimensional echocardiography compared with gated myocardial spect in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2010;154:47–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Ababneh AA, Sciacca RR, Kim B, Bergmann SR. Normal limits for left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes estimated with gated myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with normal exercise test results: influence of tracer, gender, and acquisition camera. J Nucl Cardiol. 2000;7:661–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Lomsky M, Johansson L, Gjertsson P, Bjork J, Edenbrandt L. Normal limits for left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes determined by gated single photon emission computed tomography—a comparison between two quantification methods. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2008;28:169–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar