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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Levy, W. C. Articles by Stratton, J. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Levy, W. C. Articles by Stratton, J. R.

Four Radionuclide Methods for Left Ventricular Volume Determination: Comparison of a Manual and an Automated Technique

Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine and Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Radiology, Seattle Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Correspondence: For reprints contact: Wayne C. Levy, MD, Division of Cardiology (111C), Seattle VA Medical Center, 1660 S. Columbian Way, Seattle. WA 98108.

ABSTRACT

This study compared the accuracy and reproducibility of three previously described and one new radionuclide method of measuring left ventricular volumes in 19 subjects using contrast ventriculographic volumes (n = 38, mean volume = 126.6 ml) as the gold standard. The four methods were compared using both manual and automated ROIs. For manual ROIs, the Links (189.7 ml, r = 0.85), Starling (183.2 ml, r = 0.77) and the new count ratio method (141.4 ml, r = 0.90) overestimated contrast volumes, while the Massardo method (122.5 ml, r = 0.91) provided accurate volumes. For the automated ROIs, we performed an interpolative background subtraction and used a 50% threshold of the highest count pixel to define the ventricular regions. The automated Massardo method severely underestimated the contrast volume (59.5 ml, r = 0.90), while the other automated methods yielded accurate volumes: Links (122.4 ml, r = 0.89), Starling (118.1 ml, r = 0.81) and the new count ratio method (125.0 ml, r = 0.90). The interobserver reproducibility of the automated methods was excellent (mean difference = 1%–4%) compared to the manual methods(2%–8%). Because no additional images, blood counting, attenuation, or decay correction were necessary, the manual Massardo method and the automated count ratio method are the simples to perform. We conclude that automated determination of left ventricular volumes using the new count ratio method is rapid, accurate, reproducible and could readily be incorporated into routine clinical use.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. R. Stratton, W. C. Levy, J. H. Caldwell, A. Jacobson, J. May, D. Matsuoka, and K. Madden Effects of aging on cardiovascular responses to parasympathetic withdrawal J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 4, 2003; 41(11): 2077 - 2083. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. L. Chandler, W. C. Levy, and J. R. Stratton The Circulatory Regulation of TPA and UPA Secretion, Clearance, and Inhibition During Exercise and During the Infusion of Isoproterenol and Phenylephrine Circulation, November 15, 1995; 92(10): 2984 - 2994. [Abstract] [Full Text]

				B. L. Zaret and F. J. Wackers Nuclear Cardiology- Second of Two Parts N. Engl. J. Med., September 16, 1993; 329(12): 855 - 863. [Full Text]