HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Melin, J. A. Articles by Detry, J.-M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Melin, J. A. Articles by Detry, J.-M.

Validation of Radionuclide Cardiac Output Measurements During Exercise

Division of Cardiology and the Center of Nuclear Medicine, University of Louvain Medical School, Brussels, Belgium

Correspondence: For reprints contact: J.A. Melin, MD, Centre de Médecine Nucléaire, UCL 54.30, Avenue Hippocrate 54, B-1200 Brussels, Belgium.

ABSTRACT

A nongeometric radionuclide technique with correction for attenuation was used for the determination of cardiac output and stroke volume during exercise in nine normal subjects and in ten hypertensive patients. Simultaneous reference stroke volume (range 48–159 ml) and cardiac output (range 3.6–23.8 l/min) measurements were obtained by the Fick method. Data were collected at rest and during 60° upright exercise, at two or three levels of increasing severity. Three statistical measurements were used for the comparison of both methods: correlation, precision, and accuracy. Radionuclide and Fick cardiac output measurements (n = 67, rest and exercise data) correlated well (r = 0.90). For stroke volume, the correlation was less (r = 0.64); however, the precision or random variability of both methods was similar for stroke volume (radionuclide: 8 ml or 9% Fick: 16 ml or 16).Theaccuracyor systematic error was defined as the mean difference between radionuclide and Fick measurements. The radionuclide method underestimated the Fick measurements. The systematic error was 18 ± 18 ml for stroke volume and 2.4 ± 2.4 l/m for cardiac output. A similar comparison of both methods was made on the absolute changes of stroke volume (r = 0.61; range –19 + 70 ml) and cardiac output (r = 0.82; range + 1.6 + 16.4 l/m) between rest and exercise. The precision of the two methods was similar, the systematic error was 1.9 ± 2.2 l/m for cardiac output and 6 ± 17ml for stroke volume. Thus, in these two groups of patients, although radionuclide and Fick cardiac output measurements at rest and during exercise correlated well, the radionuclide values were systematically and significantly lower.