| Journal of Nuclear Medicine | |
| Validation of QGS and 4D-MSPECT for Quantification of Left Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction from Gated 18F-FDG PET: Comparison with Cardiac MRI | |
| Patrick Reinartz1  Bernd Nowak1  Wolfgang M. Schaefer1  Harald P. Kühl1  Gabriele A. Krombach1  Hans-Juergen Kaiser1  Arno Buecker1  Claudia S.A. Lipke1  Udalrich Buell1  | |
| 关键词: gated 18F-FDG PET; cardiovascular MRI; Quantitative Gated SPECT; 4D-MSPECT; | |
| DOI : | |
| 学科分类:医学(综合) | |
| 来源: Society of Nuclear Medicine | |
PDF
|
|
【 摘 要 】
The aim of this study was to validate Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS) and 4D-MSPECT for assessing left ventricular end-diastolic and systolic volumes (EDV and ESV, respectively) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from gated 18F-FDG PET. Methods: Forty-four patients with severe coronary artery disease were examined with gated 18F-FDG PET (8 gates per cardiac cycle). EDV, ESV, and LVEF were calculated from gated 18F-FDG PET using QGS and 4D-MSPECT. Within 2 d (median), cardiovascular cine MRI (cMRI) (20 gates per cardiac cycle) was done as a reference. Results: QGS failed to accurately detect myocardial borders in 1 patient; 4D-MSPECT, in 2 patients. For the remaining 42 patients, correlation between the results of gated 18F-FDG PET and cMRI was high for EDV (R = 0.94 for QGS and 0.94 for 4D-MSPECT), ESV (R = 0.95 for QGS and 0.95 for 4D-MSPECT), and LVEF (R = 0.94 for QGS and 0.90 for 4D-MSPECT). QGS significantly (P < 0.0001) underestimated LVEF, whereas no other parameter differed significantly between gated 18F-FDG PET and cMRI for either algorithm. Conclusion: Despite small systematic differences that, among other aspects, limit interchangeability, agreement between gated 18F-FDG PET and cMRI is good across a wide range of clinically relevant volumes and LVEF values assessed by QGS and 4D-MSPECT.
【 授权许可】
Unknown
【 预 览 】
| Files | Size | Format | View |
|---|---|---|---|
| RO201912010195694ZK.pdf | 637KB |
PDF