Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of right and left ventricular function by quantitative blood-pool SPECT (QBS): Comparison with conventional methods and quantitative gated SPECT (QGS)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Though quantitative ECG-gated blood-pool SPECT (QBS) has become a popular tool in research settings, more verification is necessary for its utilization in clinical medicine. To evaluate the reliability of the measurements of left and right ventricular functions with QBS, we performed QBS, as well as first-pass pool (FPP) and ECG-gated blood-pool (GBP) studies on planar images in 41 patients and 8 healthy volunteers. Quantitative ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (QGS) was also performed in 30 of 49 subjects. First, we assessed the reproducibility of the measurements of left and right ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, RVEF) and left and right ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV, RVEDV) with QBS. Second, LVEF and RVEF obtained from QBS were compared with those from FPP and GBP, respectively. Third, LVEF and LVEDV obtained from QBS were compared with those from QGS, respectively. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibilities were excellent for LVEF, LVEDV, RVEF and RVEDV measured with QBS (r = 0.88 to 0.96, p < 0.01), while the biases in the measurements of RVEF and RVEDV were relatively large. LVEF obtained from QBS correlated significantly with those from FPP and GBP, while RVEF from QBS did not. LVEF and LVEDV obtained from QBS were significantly correlated with those from QGS, but the regression lines were not close to the lines of identity. In conclusion, the measurements of LVEF and LVEDV with QBS have good reproducibility and are useful clinically, while those of RVEF and RVEDV are less useful compared with LVEF and LVEDV. The algorithm of QBS for the measurements of RVEF and RVEDV remains to be improved.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wackers FJ, Berger HJ, Johnstone DE, Goldman L, Reduto LA, Langou RA, et al. Multiple gated cardiac blood pool imaging for left ventricular ejection fraction: validation of the technique and assessment of variability.Am J Cardiol 1979; 43:1159–1166.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hecht HS, Josephson MA, Hopkins JM, Singh BN. Repro- ducibility of equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography in patients with coronary artery disease: response of left ventricular ejection fraction and regional wall motion to supine bicycle exercise.Am Heart J 1982; 104:1159–1167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ito T, Maeda H, Takeda K, Nakagawa T. Factor analysis of gated cardiac blood-pool data: application to patients with congenital heart disease.Nucl Med Commun 1991; 12:865–873.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sakata K, Yoshino H, Kurihara H, Iwamori K, Houshaku H, Yanagisawa A, et al. Prognostic significance of persistent right ventricular dysfunction as assessed by radionuclide angiocardiography in patients with inferior wall acute myo-cardial infarction.Am J Cardiol 2000; 85:939–944.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kerwin WF, Botvinick EH, O’Connell JW, Merrick SH, DeMarco T, Chatterjee K, et al. Ventricular contraction abnormalities in dilated cardiomyopathy: effect of biventricular pacing to correct interventricular dyssynchrony.J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 35:1221–1227.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Germano G. Automatic analysis of ventricular function by nuclear imaging.Curr Opin Cardiol 1998; 13:425–429.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Kriekinge SD, Berman DS, Germano G. Automatic quantification of left ventricular ejection fraction from gated blood pool SPECT.J Nucl Cardiol 1999; 6:498–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Daou D, Van Kriekinge SD, Coaguila C, Lebtahi R, Fourme T, Sitbon O, et al. Automatic quantification of right ventricular function with gated blood pool SPECT.J Nucl Cardiol 2004; 11:293–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fukuchi K, Yasumura Y, Kiso K, Kohei H, Miyatake K, Ishida Y. Gated myocardial SPECT to predict response to beta-blocker therapy in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy.J Nucl Med 2004; 45:527–531.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Abe M, Kazatani Y, Fukida H, Tatsuno H, Habara H, Shinbata H. Left ventricular volumes, ejection fraction, and regional wall motion calculated with gated technetium- 99m tetrofosmin SPECT in reperfused acute myocardial infarction at super-acute phase: Comparison with left ventriculography.J Nucl Cardiol 2000; 7:569–574.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mazzanti M, Germano G, Kiat H, Friedman J, Berman DS. Fast technetium 99m-labeled sestamibi gated single-photon emission computed tomography for evaluation of myocardial infarction.J Nucl Caldiol 1996; 3:143–149.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Vaduganathan P, He ZX, Vick GW III, Mahmarian JJ, Verani MS. Evaluation of left ventricular wall motion, volumes, and ejection fraction by gated myocardial tomography with technetium 99m-labeled tetrofosmin: a comparison with cine magnetic resonance imaging.J Nucl Cardiol 1999; 6:3–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tadamura E, Kudoh T, Motooka M, Inubushi M, Okada T, Kubo S, et al. Use of technetium 99m-sestamibi ECG-gated single-photon emission tomography for the evaluation of left ventricular function following coronary artery bypass graft: comparison with three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging.Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26:705–712.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Yoshida J, Hasegawa S, Yamaguchi H, Tokita N, Paul AK, Xiuli MU, et al. Left Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction Calculated from Quantitative Electrocardiographic- Gated99mTc-Tetrofosmin Myocardial SPECT.J Nucl Med 1999; 40:1693–1698.

    Google Scholar 

  15. White HD, Noms RM, Brown MA, Brandt PW, Whitlock RM, Wild CJ. Left ventricular end-systolic volume as the major determinant of survival after recovery from myocardial infarction.Circulation 1987; 76:44–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.Lancet 1986; 8476:307–310.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wright GA, Thackray S, Howey S, Cleland JG. Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated blood-pool SPECT: comparison with planar gated blood-pool imaging and assessment of repeatability in patients with heart failure.J Nucl Med 2003; 44:494–498.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Higuchi T, Taki J, Nakajima K, Kinuma S, Ikeda M, Namura M, et al. Evaluation of left and right ventricular functional parameters with automatic edge detection program of ECG gated blood SPET.Nucl Med Commun 2003; 24:559–563.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hacker M, Hoyer X, Kupzyk S, Fougere CL, Kois J, Stempfle HU, et al. Clinical validation of the gated blood pool SPECT QBS((R)) processing software in congestive heart failure patients: correlation with MUGA, first-pass RNV and 2D-echocardiography.Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2005; 22:1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  20. De Bondt P, Claessens T, Rys B, De Winter O, Vandenberghe S, Segers P, et al. Accuracy of 4 different algorithms for the analysis of tomographic radionuclide ventriculography using a physical, dynamic 4-chamber cardiac phantom.J Nucl Med 2005; 46:165–171.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kondo C, Fukushima K, Kusakabe K. Measurement of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by quantitative gated SPET, contrast ventriculography and magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis.Eur J Nucl Mol Imaging 2003; 30:851–858.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Thorley PJ, Plein S, Bloomer TN, Ridgway JP, Sivananthan UM. Comparison of99mTc tetrofosmin gated SPECT measurements of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction with MRI over a wide range of values.Nucl Med Commun 2003; 24:763–769.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Bax JJ, Lamb H, Dibbets P, Pelikan H, Boersma E, Viergever EP, et al. Comparison of gated single-photon emission computed tomography with magnetic resonance imaging for evaluation of left ventricular function in ischemic car- diomyopathy.Am J Cardiol 2000; 86:1299–1305.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kjaer A, Lebech AM, Hesse B, Petersen CL. Right-sided cardiac function in healthy volunteers measured by first- pass radionuclide ventriculography and gated blood-pool SPECT: comparison with cine MRI.Clin Physiol Fund Imaging 2005; 25:344–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Keiichi Odagiri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Odagiri, K., Wakabayashi, Y., Tawarahara, K. et al. Evaluation of right and left ventricular function by quantitative blood-pool SPECT (QBS): Comparison with conventional methods and quantitative gated SPECT (QGS). Ann Nucl Med 20, 519–526 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026815

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03026815

Key words

Navigation