Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Noninvasive modalities for the assessment of left ventricular function: All are equal but some are more equal than others

  • Editorial
  • Published:
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology Aims and scope

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Guidance on the use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators for arrhythmias (review of existing guidance No. 11). National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. November 2005. Available from: URL: www.nice.org.uk.

  2. The Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology. Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic heart failure: full text (update 2005); doi:10-1093/eurheartj/ehi205.

  3. Broderick TM, Bourdillon PD, Ryan T, Feigenbaum H, Dillon JC, Armstrong WF. Comparison of regional and global left ventricular function by serial echocardiograms after reperfusion in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1989;2:315–23.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Panza JA, Laurienzo JM, Curiel RV, Quyyumi AA, Cannon RO III. Transesophageal dobutamine stress echocardiography for evaluation of patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;24:1260–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Senior R, Sridhara BS, Basu S, Henley M, Handler CE, Raftery EB, et al. Comparison of radionuclide ventriculography and 2D echocardiography for the measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction following acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 1994; 15:1235–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hoffmann R, Lethen H, Marwick T, Arnese M, Fioretti P, Pingitore A, et al. Analysis of interinstitutional observer agreement in interpretation of dobutamine stress echocardiograms. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;27:330–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lim TK, Burden L, Janardhanan R, Ping C, Moon J, Pennell D, et al. Improved accuracy of low-power contrast echocardiography for the assessment of left ventricular remodeling compared with unenhanced harmonic echocardiography after acute myocardial infarction: comparison with cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2005;18:1203–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Malm S, Frigstad S, Sagberg E, Larsson H, Skjaerpe T. Accurate and reproducible measurement of left ventricular volume and ejection fraction by contrast echocardiography: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1030–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoffmann R, von Bardeleben S, ten Cate F, Borges AC, Kasprzak J, Firschke C, et al. Assessment of systolic left ventricular function: a multi-centre comparison of cineventriculography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, unenhanced and contrast-enhanced echocardiography. Eur Heart J 2005;26:607–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoffmann R, von Bardeleben S, Kasprzak JD, Borges AC, ten Cate F, Firschke C, et al. Analysis of regional left ventricular function by cineventriculography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, and unenhanced and contrast-enhanced echocardiography: a multicenter comparison of methods. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:121–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jacobs LD, Salgo IS, Goonewardena S, Weinert L, Coon P, Bardo D, et al. Rapid online quantification of left ventricular volume from real-time three-dimensional echocardiographic data. Eur Heart J 2006;27:460–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Jenkins C, Bricknell K, Hanekom L, Marwick TH. Reproducibility and accuracy of echocardiographic measurements of left ventricular parameters using real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:878–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee D, Fuisz AR, Fan PH, Hsu TL, Liu CP, Chiang HT. Real-time 3-dimensional echocardiographic evaluation of left ventricular volume: correlation with magnetic resonance imaging-a validation study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2001;14:1001–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bellenger NG, Burgess MI, Ray SG, Lahiri A, Coats AJ, Cleland JG, et al. Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable? Eur Heart J 2000;21:1387–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Nichols K, Lefkowitz D, Faber T, Folks R, Cooke D, Garcia EV, et al. Echocardiographic validation of gated SPECT ventricular function measurements. J Nucl Med 2000;41:1308–14.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yoshioka J, Hasegawa S, Yamaguchi H, Tokita N, Paul AK, Xiuli M, et al. Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction calculated from quantitative electrocardiographic-gated 99mTc-tetrofosmin myocardial SPECT. J Nucl Med 1999;40:1693–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Tadamura E, Kudoh T, Motooka M, Inubushi M, Shirakawa S, Hattori N, et al. Assessment of regional and global left ventricular function by reinjection T1-201 and rest Tc-99m sestamibi ECGgated SPECT: comparison with three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:991–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bavelaar-Croon CD, Kayser HW, van der Wall EE, de Roos A, Dibbets-Schneider P, Pauwels EK, et al. Left ventricular function: correlation of quantitative gated SPECT and MR imaging over a wide range of values. Radiology 2000;217:572–5.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bax JJ, Lamb H, Dibbets P, Pelikan H, Boersma E, Viergever EP, et al. Comparison of gated single-photon emission computed tomography with magnetic resonance imaging for evaluation of left ventricular function in ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol 2000;86:1299–305.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Thorley PJ, Smith JM. Repeatability of left ventricular ejection fraction and volume measurement for 99mTc-tetrofosmin gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Nucl Med Commun 2005;26:345–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Gayed I, Cid E, Boccalandero F, Podoloff D. Factors affecting left ventricular ejection fraction using automated quantitative gated SPECT. Clin Nucl Med 2003;28:290–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hachamovitch R, Berman DS, Kiat H, Cohen I, Friedman JD, Shaw LJ. Value of stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in patients with normal resting electrocardiograms: an evaluation of incremental prognostic value and cost-effectiveness. Circulation 2002;105:823–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. 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;100:1035–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sharir T, Germano G, Kang X, Lewin HC, Miranda R, Cohen I, et al. Prediction of myocardial infarction versus cardiac death by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: risk stratification by the amount of stress-induced ischemia and the poststress ejection fraction. J Nucl Med 2001;42:831–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Lum DP, Coel MN. Comparison of automatic quantification software for the measurement of ventricular volume and ejection fraction in gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. Nucl Med Commun 2003;24:259–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Utsunomiya D, Tomiguchi S, Awai K, Shiraishi S, Nakaura T, Yamashita Y. Mutidetector-row CT and quantitative gated SPECT for the assessment of left ventricular function in small hearts: the cardiac physical phantom study using a combined SPECT/CT system. Eur Radio l 2006: 1-8.

  29. Lim TK, Burden L, Janardhanan R, Dwivedi G, Ping C, Moon J, et al. Contrast echocardiography versus gated single photon emission computed tomography for the assessment of parameters of left ventricular remodeling after acute myocardial infarction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2006;19:280–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA, Danias PG. Electrocardiogram-gated single-photon emission computed tomography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: a meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:2059–68.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chan J, Jenkins C, Khafagi F, Du L, Marwick TH. What is the optimal clinical technique for measurement of left ventricular volume after myocardial infarction? A comparative study of 3-dimensional echocardiography, single photon emission computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2006;19:192–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Vallejo E, Dione DP, Sinusas AJ, Wackers FJ. Assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction with quantitative gated SPECT: accuracy and correlation with first-pass radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Cardiol 2000;7:461–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Semelka RC, Tomei E, Wagner S, Mayo J, Kondo C, Suzuki J, et al. Normal left ventricular dimensions and function: interstudy repro- ducibility of measurements with cine MR imaging. Radiology 1990;174(Pt 1):763–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bellenger NG, Davies LC, Francis JM, Coats AJ, Pennell DJ. Reduction in sample size for studies of remodeling in heart failure by the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2000;2:271–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Salm LP, Schuijf JD, de Roos A, Lamb HJ, Vliegen HW, Jukema JW, et al. Global and regional left ventricular function assessment with 16-detector row CT: comparison with echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Eur J Echocardiogr. In press 2005, Aug 9 (Epub ahead of print).

  36. Dirksen MS, Bax JJ, de Roos A, Jukema JW, van der Geest RJ, Geleijns K, et al. Usefulness of dynamic multislice computed tomography of left ventricular function in unstable angina pectoris and comparison with echocardiography. Am J Cardiol 2002;90:1157–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schuijf JD, Bax JJ, Salm LP, Jukema JW, Lamb HJ, van der Wall EE, et al. Noninvasive coronary imaging and assessment of left ventricular function using 16-slice computed tomography. Am J Cardiol 2005;95:571–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Yamamuro M, Tadamura E, Kubo S, Toyoda H, Nishina T, Ohba M, et al. Cardiac functional analysis with multi-detector row CT and segmental reconstruction algorithm: comparison with echocardiography, SPECT, and MR imaging. Radiology 2005;234:381–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Grude M, Juergens KU, Wichter T, Paul M, Fallenberg EM, Muller JG, et al. Evaluation of global left ventricular myocardial function with electrocardiogram-gated multidetector computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2003;38:653–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Mahnken AH, Koos R, Katoh M, Spuentrup E, Busch P, Wildberger JE, et al. Sixteen-slice spiral CT versus MR imaging for the assessment of left ventricular function in acute myocardial infarction. Eur Radiol 2005;15:714–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Belge B, Coche E, Pasquet A, Vanoverschelde JL, Gerber BL. Accurate estimation of global and regional cardiac function by retrospectively gated multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol. In press 2006.

  42. Raman SV, Shah M, McCarthy B, Garcia A, Ferketich AK. Multi-detector row cardiac computed tomography accurately quantifies right and left ventricular size and function compared with cardiac magnetic resonance. Am Heart J 2006;151:736–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Heuschmid M, Rothfuss JK, Schroeder S, Fenchel M, Stauder N, Burgstahler C, et al. Assessment of left ventricular myocardial function using 16-slice multidetector-row computed tomography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiography. Eur Radiol 2006;16:551–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Dewey M, Muller M, Teige F, Hamm B. Evaluation of a semiautomatic software tool for left ventricular function analysis with 16-slice computed tomography. Eur Radiol 2006;16:25–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Schlosser T, Pagonidis K, Herborn CU, Hunold P, Waltering KU, Lauenstein TC, et al. Assessment of left ventricular parameters using 16-MDCT and new software for endocardial and epicardial border delineation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:765–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Henneman, MM, Schuijf JD, Jukema JW, Holman ER, Lam HJ, de Roos A, et al. Assessment of global and regional left ventricular function and volumes with 64-slice MSCT: A comparison with 2D electrocardiography. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:480–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Thompson RC, Cullom SJ. Issues regarding radiation dosage of cardiac nuclear and radiography procedures. J Nucl Cardiol 2006; 13:19–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Boehm T, Alkadhi H, Roffi M, Willmann JK, Desbiolles LM, Marincek B, et al. Time-effectiveness, observer-dependence, and accuracy of measurements of left ventricular ejection fraction using 4-channel MDCT. Rofo 2004;176:529–37.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Juergens KU, Grude M, Maintz D, Fallenberg EM, Wichter T, Heindel W, et al. Multi-detector row CT of left ventricular function with dedicated analysis software versus MR imaging: initial experience. Radiology 2004;230:403–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Northwick Park Hospital, HA1 3UJ, Harrow, Middlesex, England

    Tiong Keng Lim & Roxy Senior

Authors
  1. Tiong Keng Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Roxy Senior
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roxy Senior.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lim, T.K., Senior, R. Noninvasive modalities for the assessment of left ventricular function: All are equal but some are more equal than others. J Nucl Cardiol 13, 445–449 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2006.05.011

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2006.05.011

Search

Navigation