Novel algorithm for quantitative assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony with ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: useful technique for management of cardiac resynchronization therapy
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) is the established treatment for patients with chronic and severe heart failure, and it has been reported that the presence of left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony is one of the most important factors which predict positive response of this therapy. In the present study, we developed new software algorithm for quantitative assessment of LV dyssynchrony from ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (GMPS), and evaluated its utility for the management of CRT.
Thirty-three patients with chronic severe heart failure were studied. GMPS was performed with 16 frame per-cardiac-cycle before and 6 months after CRT and LV end-diastolic volume, end-systolic volume (LVESV), ejection fraction (LVEF) were calculated by QGS software. We generated the time–activity curve per-cardiac-cycle in 4 myocardial segments by Fourier transform curve-fitting of the 16 serial count values, and measured the time from R-wave to the maximum-count point [time to end-systole (TES)] in each. For the evaluation of the degree of LV dyssynchrony, we used the maximum difference in TES (ΔTES) among the 4 segments which corrected for R–R time as dyssynchrony index (DI). Moreover, DI at baseline evaluated by GMPS was compared with the echocardiographic index of LV dyssynchrony; maximum difference of time to peak velocity (ΔTPV) evaluated by tissue Doppler imaging (TDI).
DI before CRT showed a significant correlation with the LV function, such as LVEF, LVESV (DI vs. LVEF; r = 0.57, P < 0.0001. DI vs. LVESV; r = 0.64, P < 0.0001). The study subjects were divided into 2 groups, responder group (R-Gp) with LVEF increase >10% or LVESV decrease >10% and non-responder group (NR-Gp). DI before CRT was significantly larger in R-Gp than in NR-Gp (25.9 ± 22.2 vs. 10.8 ± 8.9, P = 0.01). In R-Gp, DI showed a significant decrease after CRT (25.9 ± 22.2 → 13.6 ± 10.9, P < 0.05). DI at baseline measured by GMPS correlated significantly with ΔTPV at baseline measured by TDI (r = 0.38, P < 0.05).
This new algorithm for the estimation of LV dyssynchrony might be comparable to TDI, and contributes to the prediction and the evaluation for the response of CRT.
KeywordsCardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) Left ventricular dyssynchrony ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT
- 5.Gregoratos G, Abrams J, Epstein AE, Freedman RA, Hayes DL, Hlatky MA, et al. ACC/AHA/NASPE 2002 Guideline update for implantation of cardiac pacemakers and antiarrhythmia devices—summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/NASPE Committee to update the 1998 Pacemaker Guidelines). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40(9):1703–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Hunt SA, Abraham WT, Chin MH, Feldman AM, Francis GS, Ganiats TG, et al. ACC/AHA 2005 Guideline update for the diagnosis and management of chronic heart failure in the adult: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Writing Committee to update the 2001 guidelines for the evaluation and management of heart failure): developed in collaboration with the American College of Chest Physicians and the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation: endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2005;112(12):e154–235.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Bax JJ, Abraham T, Barold SS, Breithardt OA, Fung JW, Garrigue S, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy: part 1—issues before device implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(12):2153–67.Google Scholar
- 9.Yu CM, Fung JW, Zhang Q, Chan CK, Chan YS, Lin H, et al. Tissue Doppler imaging is superior to strain rate imaging and postsystolic shortening on the prediction of reverse remodeling in both ischemic and nonischemic heart failure after cardiac resynchronization therapy. Circulation. 2004;110(1):66–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Smith WH, Kastner RJ, Calnon DA, Segalla D, Beller GA, Watson DD. Quantitative gated single photon emission computed tomography imaging: a counts-based method for display and measurement of regional and global ventricular systolic function. J Nucl Cardiol. 1997;4(6):451–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Stollfuss JC, Haas F, Matsunari I, Neverve J, Nekolla S, Schneider-Eicke J, et al. Regional myocardial wall thickening and global ejection fraction in patients with low angiographic left ventricular ejection fraction assessed by visual and quantitative resting ECG-gated 99mTc-tetrofosmin single-photon emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25(5):522–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Henneman MM, Chen J, Ypenburg C, Dibbets P, Bleeker GB, Boersma E, et al. Phase analysis of gated myocardial perfusion single-photon emission computed tomography compared with tissue Doppler imaging for the assessment of left ventricular dyssynchrony. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(16):1708–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Chen J, Garcia EV, Folks RD, Cooke CD, Faber TL, Tauxe EL, et al. Onset of left ventricular mechanical contraction as determined by phase analysis of ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging: development of a diagnostic tool for assessment of cardiac mechanical dyssynchrony. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12(6):687–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Yamamoto A, Takahashi N, Munakata K, Hosoya T, Shiiba M, Okuyama T, et al. Global and regional evaluation of systolic and diastolic left ventricular temporal parameters using a novel program for ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT—validation by comparison with gated equilibrium radionuclide angiography and speckle-tracking radial strain from echocardiography. Ann Nucl Med. 2007;21(2):115–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Morishima I, Sone T, Tsuboi H, Mukawa H, Uesugi M, Hayashi K. Demonstration of left ventricular dyssynchrony and resynchrony by ECG-gated SPECT with cardioGRAF in a patient with advanced heart failure and narrow QRS complex. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2009;24(2):151–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar