...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Nuclear Medicine >Evaluation of left and right ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated blood-pool SPECT in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: Comparison with cardiac MRI
【24h】

Evaluation of left and right ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated blood-pool SPECT in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: Comparison with cardiac MRI

机译:扩张型心肌病患者门控血池SPECT左右室射血分数和容积的评估:与心脏MRI的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This prospective study evaluated the accuracy of electrocardiogram-gated blood-pool SPECT (GBPS) for the assessment of left ventricular (LV) and right ventricular (RV) ejection fraction (EF), end-diastolic volume (EDV), and end-systolic volume (ESV) in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging as the reference standard. Methods: Thirty-two patients (24 men and 8 women; mean age, 51 y) with a diagnosis of idiopathic DCM underwent GBPS and CMR. LV and RV parameters including EDV, ESV, and EF from GBPS were calculated using fully automated gradient software and compared with those obtained by CMR. Results: Biventricular volumes were underestimated by GBPS, compared with CMR (P < 0.001). We found no statistical difference between these 2 methods in the assessment of LV EF (P = 0.23), whereas RV EF was overestimated by GBPS (P < 0.001 vs. CMR). Regression analysis yielded significant correlations between GBPS and CMR in the assessments of biventricular parameters (r = 0.83 for LV EDV, 0.88 for LV ESV, 0.89 for LV EF, 0.86 for RV EDV, 0.86 for RV ESV, and 0.62 for RV EF; all P < 0.001). Comparison of the deviations of RV indices between GBPS and CMR with the ratio of RV EDV to LV EDV showed that there was a statistically significant trend for RV volumes to be underestimated and for RV EF to be overestimated as the biventricular volumetric ratio decreased (r = 0.61 for RV EDV, 0.68 for RV ESV, and -0.55 for RV EF; all P < 0.001). Conclusion: For patients with DCM, GBPS correlated well with CMR for the assessment of biventricular parameters, but RV indices should be cautiously interpreted.
机译:这项前瞻性研究评估了心电图门控血池SPECT(GBPS)评估左心室(LV)和右心室(RV)射血分数(EF),舒张末期容积(EDV)和收缩末期的准确性以心脏磁共振(CMR)成像为参考标准,评估扩张型心肌病(DCM)患者的血容量(ESV)。方法:对32例诊断为特发性DCM的患者(男24例,女8例;平均年龄51岁)行GBPS和CMR检查。使用全自动梯度软件计算来自GBPS的LV和RV参数,包括EDV,ESV和EF,并将其与CMR获得的参数进行比较。结果:与CMR相比,GBPS低估了双室容积(P <0.001)。我们发现这两种方法在评估LV EF方面无统计学差异(P = 0.23),而GBPS高估了RV EF(P <0.001 vs. CMR)。回归分析得出双心室参数评估中GBPS和CMR之间存在显着相关性(LV EDV r = 0.83,LV ESV r 0.88,LV EF 0.89,RV EDV 0.86,RV ESV 0.86,RV EF 0.62;全部P <0.001)。 GBPS和CMR之间的RV指数偏差与RV EDV与LV EDV之比的比较表明,随着双心室容积比的降低,RV体积被低估而RV EF被高估存在统计学上的显着趋势(r = RV EDV为0.61,RV ESV为0.68,RV EF为-0.55;所有P <0.001)。结论:对于DCM患者,GBPS与CMR在评估双心室参数方面具有很好的相关性,但应谨慎解释RV指数。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号