Skip to main content

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of filtrating and reconstruction method on the left ventricular ejection fraction derived from GSPET: a statistical comparison of angiography and echocardiography

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

Abstract

Objective

There are different protocols of reconstruction in myocardial gated imaging that produce different values of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF). We attempted to determine how the parameters of reconstruction affect the calculated EF. The results were statistically compared with the values obtained from angiography and echocardiography.

Methods

In this retrospective study, the data from 23 patients were used. All the patients had the angiographic and the echocardiographic data within 2 weeks before the test. Imaging was performed using a single-head gamma camera using technetium-99 methoxyisobutylisonitrile. The image data were reconstructed using 50 different combinations of the ramp, Hanning, Butterworth, Wiener, and Metz filters. The ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) technique was also examined using 12 combinations of iteration and subset. The calculated EF values were analyzed and compared with the echocardiographic and angiographic results.

Results

The backprojection technique produced higher values of EF than those derived from echocardiography and angiography. The OSEM on the other hand produced lower values when compared with echocardiography and angiography. On using the backprojection technique, the maximum correlation between the values derived from gated single-photon emission tomography and echocardiography (r = 0.88, P < 0.01) and angiography (r = 0.81, P < 0.01) was observed when using the Metz filter (full width at half maximum = 5 mm and order = 9) and the Gaussian filter (α = 3), respectively. In the case of the OSEM technique, the maximum correlation with both angiography and echocardiography was observed when using the iteration = 2 and the subset = 12.

Conclusions

On the average, the backprojection technique produces higher values, and iteration technique produces lower estimation of the EF when compared with angiography and echocardiography.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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. Picozzi R, Tarolo GL, Ricci A, Palagi B, Zatta G, Baroffio R. Clinical value of phase and amplitude images and left ventricle time-activity curves in assessing patients with acute myocardial infarction. Eur J Nucl Med 1984;9:6–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Thüring C, Hess OM, Murakami T, Goebel NH, Grimm J, Krayenbühl HP. Normal values of left ventricular function: biplanar angiocardiography with reference to sex-specific differences. Rofo 1989;150:562–568.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuribayashi S. Angiocardiographic evaluation of left ventricular volumes and wall motion in infants and children: determination of normal values and analysis in diseased hearts. Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1989;49:899–914.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Pelà G, Bruschi G, Montagna L, Manara M, Manca C. Left and right ventricular adaptation assessed by Doppler tissue echocardiography in athletes. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2004;17:205–211.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Yu WC, Lee WS, Huang WP, Wu C, Lin YP, Chen C. Evaluation of cardiac function by tissue Doppler echocardiography: hemodynamic determinants and clinical application. Ultrasound Med Biol 2005;31:23–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Go V, Bhatt MR, Hendel RC. The diagnostic and prognostic value of ECG-gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Nucl Med 2004;45:912–921.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yoon SN, Lee DS, Chung JK, Lee MC. Comparative study of single-injection, single-acquisition 99mTc-MIBI gated SPET and stress-rest perfusion SPET for the evaluation of myocardial viability after bypass surgery in coronary artery disease. J Nucl Med 2000;27:1747–1753.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gonzalez JM, Castell-Conesa J, Candell-Riera J. Relevance of 99mTc-MIBI rest uptake, ejection fraction and location of contractile abnormality in predicting myocardial recovery after revascularization. Nucl Med Commun 2001;22:795–805.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bavelaar-Croon CD, Atsma DE, VanderWall EE. The additive value of gated SPET myocardial perfusion imaging in patients with known and suspected coronary artery disease. Nucl Med Commun 2001;22:45–46.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Deou D, Vilain D, Colin P, Lebtahi R, Fourme T, Coaguila C, et al. Comparative value of ECG-gated blood pool SPET and ECG-gated myocardial perfusion SPET in the assessment of global systolic left ventricular function. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:859–867.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Everaert H, Bossuyt A, Franken PR. Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated single photon emission tomographic myocardial perfusion images: comparison between two algorithms working in three-dimensional space. J Nucl Cardiol 1997;4:472–476.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Germano G, Kiat H, Kavanagh PB, Moriel M, Mazzanti M, Su HT, et al. Automatic quantification of ejection fraction from gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med 1995;36:2138–2147.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. He ZX, Cwajg E, Preslar JS, Mahmarian JJ, Verani MS. Accuracy of left ventricular ejection fraction determined by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT with Tl-201 and Tc-99m sestamibi: comparison with firstpass radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Med 1999;6:412–417.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee DS, Cheon GJ, Ahn JY, Chung JK, Lee MC. Reproducibility of assessment of myocardial function using gated 99Tc(m)-MIBI SPECT and quantitative software. J Nucl Med Commun 2000;21:1127–1134.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Germano G, Berman DS. Quantitative single-photon emission computed tomography imaging. Curr Cardiol Rep 2005;7:136–142.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tout DA, Rogers A, Aswegen AV, Underwood SR. Left ventricular function parameters obtained from gated myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging: a comparison of two data processing systems. Nucl Med Commun 2005;26:103–107.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. America YG, Bax JJ, Dibbets-Schneider P, Pauwels EK, VanderWall EE. Evaluation of the quantitative gated SPECT (QGS) software program in the presence of large perfusion defects. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2005;21:519–529.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Abidov A, Germano G, Hachamovitch R, Berman DS. Gated SPECT in assessment of regional and global left ventricular function: major tool of modern nuclear imaging. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:261–279.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vallejo E, Dione DP, Sinusas AJ, Wackers FJ. Assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction with quantitative gated SPECT: accuracy and correlation with first-pass radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Cardiol 2000;7:461–470.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Vera P, Manrique A, Pontvianne V. A thallium-gated SPECT in patients with major myocardial infarction: effect of filtering and zooming in comparison with equilibrium radionuclide imaging and left ventriculography. J Nucl Med 1999;40:513–521.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Williams KA, Taillon LA. Left ventricular function in patients with coronary artery disease assessed by gated tomographic myocardial perfusion images: comparison with assessment by contrast ventriculography and first-pass radionuclide angiography J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;27:173–181.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Vaduganathan P, He ZX, Vick GW, 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 

  23. Vallejo E, Dione DP, Bruni WL, Constable RT, Borek P, Soares JP, et al. Reproducibility and accuracy of gated SPECT for determination of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: experimental validation using MRI. J Nucl Med 2000;41:874–882.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wright GA, McDade M, Keeble W. Are ejection fractions from gated SPECT perfusion studies clinically useful? A comparison with radionuclide ventriculography. Physiol Meas 2001;22:413–422.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Gholamrezanezhad A, Mirpour S, Esfehani AF, Saghari M, Mirpour K, Beiki D, et al. A correlative study comparing current different methods of calculating left ventricular ejection fraction. Nucl Med Commun 2007;28:41–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pai M, Yang YJ, Im KC, Hong IK, Yun SC, Kang DH, et al. Factors affecting accuracy of ventricular volume and ejection fraction measured by gated Tl-201 myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2006;22:671–681.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fredericks N, Baxter P, McKay E, Smart R. An assessment of the sensitivity of the Cedars-Sinai quantitative gated SPECT software to changes in the reconstruction of the short-axis slices. J Nucl Med Technol 1999;27:123–126.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Wright GA, McDade M, Martin W, Hutton I. Quantitative gated SPECT: the effect of reconstruction filter on calculated left ventricular ejection fractions and volumes. Phys Med Biol 2002;47:N99–105.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vakhtangandze T, Hall DO, Zananiri FV, Rees MR. The effect of Butterworth and Metz reconstruction filters on volume and ejection fraction calculations with 99Tcm gated myocardial SPECT. Br J Radiol 2005;78:733–736.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Manrique A, Hitzel A, Gardin I, Dacher JN, Vera P. Impact of Wiener filter in determining the left ventricular volume and ejection fraction using thallium-201 gated SPECT. Nucl Med Commun 2003;24:907–914.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Wheat JM, Currie GM. QGS ejection fraction reproducibility in gated SPECT comparing pre-filtered and post-filtered reconstruction. Nucl Med Commun 2006;27:57–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Marie PY, Djaballah W, Franken PR, Vanhove C, Muller MA, Boutley H, et al. OSEM reconstruction, associated with temporal Fourier and depth-dependant resolution recovery filtering, enhances results from sestamibi and 201Tl 16-interval gated SPECT. J Nucl Med 2005;46:1789–1795.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Sandler H, Dodge HT. The use of single plane angiocardiograms for the calculation of left ventricular volume in man. Am Heart J 1968;75:325–334.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Kuroda T, Seward JB, Rumberger JA, Yanagi H, Tajik AJ. Left ventricular volume and mass: comparative study of two-dimensional echocardiography and ultrafast computed tomography. Echocardiography 1994;11:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. 3rd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–310.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Henderson AR. Testing experimental data for univariate normality. Clin Chim Acta 2006;366:112–129.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Murase K, Ishine M, Kawamura M, Tanada S, Iio A, Hamamoto K. A unified design algorithm of two-dimensional digital filters for radioisotope image processing. Phys Med Biol 1989;34:859–873.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Defrise M, Townsend DW, Clack R. Three-dimensional image reconstruction from complete projections. Phys Med Biol 1989;34:573–587.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Habash-Bseiso DE, Rokey R, Berger CJ, Weier AW, Chyou PH. Accuracy of noninvasive ejection fraction measurement in a large community-based clinic. Clin Med Res 2005;3:75–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Physics, School of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, P.O. Box 14115-331, Tehran, Iran

    Ahmed Bitarafan & Hossein Rajabi

Authors
  1. Ahmed Bitarafan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hossein Rajabi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hossein Rajabi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bitarafan, A., Rajabi, H. The effect of filtrating and reconstruction method on the left ventricular ejection fraction derived from GSPET: a statistical comparison of angiography and echocardiography. Ann Nucl Med 22, 707–713 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-008-0161-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-008-0161-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation