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

This Article Abstract Full Text 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 Feng, B. Articles by Gullberg, G. T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Feng, B. Articles by Gullberg, G. T.

Calculation of the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Without Edge Detection: Application to Small Hearts

¹ Radiology Department, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
² Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California

View larger version (18K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 1. Prolate spheroid transformation of ellipsoid. (Left) A 3D ellipsoid in Cartesian coordinate system. (Center) Half of 2D vertical slice through ellipsoid. (Right) Prolate spheroid transformation of 2D slice in Center.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 2. Plot of calculated volume Vmax, volume enclosed by layer of maximum counts, vs. targeted LV cavity volume Vc for 4 sets of phantoms with different ratios between volumes of LV myocardium and volumes of LV cavity (Vmyo/Vc = ß).

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 3. Plots of QGS LVEF (A) and LVEF by our method (B) vs. targeted LVEF (tLVEF) and targeted end-diastolic volume (EDV). For phantoms with large EDVs (EDV 80 mL), QGS LVEF and LVEF by our method closely approximate tLVEF. However, for small hearts (EDV < 80 mL), our method produced better results than did QGS method.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 4. (A) Plot of (difference between QGS LVEF and targeted LVEF [tLVEF]) vs. tLVEF. (B) Plot of (difference between LVEF calculated by our method and tLVEF) vs. tLVEF.

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 5. For 44 patients with large EDVs (EDV 80 mL), plots of QGS LVEF vs. (LVEF)max by our method. Slope of fitted line is used to calculate LVEF.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 6. Histogram shows difference between LVEFs obtained with our method and those obtained with QGS LVEF method for 44 patients with large hearts (EDV 80 mL).

View larger version (16K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 7. For 14 patients with small EDVs (EDV < 80 mL), plots show LVEFs by our method vs. QGS LVEFs. Five patients had severely overestimated LVEFs (>9%) obtained by QGS LVEF method compared with LVEFs obtained by our method.