Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT underestimates left ventricular volumes and shows high variability compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging -- a comparison of four different commercial automated software packages
1 Department of Clinical Physiology, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
2 Department of Radiation Physics, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Lund, Sweden
BMC Medical Imaging 2010, 10:10 doi:10.1186/1471-2342-10-10Published: 25 May 2010
We sought to compare quantification of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by different gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) programs with each other and to magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.
N = 100 patients with known or suspected coronary artery disease were examined at rest with 99 mTc-tetrofosmin gated MPS and cardiac MR imaging. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume (SV) and ejection fraction (EF) were obtained by analysing gated MPS data with four different programs: Quantitative Gated SPECT (QGS), GE MyoMetrix, Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb) and Exini heart.
All programs showed a mean bias compared to MR imaging of approximately -30% for EDV (-22 to -34%, p < 0.001 for all), ESV (-12 to -37%, p < 0.001 for ECTb, p < 0.05 for Exini, p = ns for QGS and MyoMetrix) and SV (-21 to -41%, p < 0.001 for all). Mean bias ± 2 SD for EF (% of EF) was -9 ± 27% (p < 0.01), 6 ± 29% (p = ns), 15 ± 27% (p < 0.001) and 0 ± 28% (p = ns) for QGS, ECTb, MyoMetrix, and Exini, respectively.
Gated MPS, systematically underestimates left ventricular volumes by approximately 30% and shows a high variability, especially for ESV. For EF, accuracy was better, with a mean bias between -15 and 6% of EF. It may be of value to take this into consideration when determining absolute values of LV volumes and EF in a clinical setting.