Gated F-18 FDG PET for Assessment of Left Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction Using QGS and 4D-MSPECT in Patients with Heart Failure: A Comparison with Cardiac MRIReport as inadecuate




Gated F-18 FDG PET for Assessment of Left Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction Using QGS and 4D-MSPECT in Patients with Heart Failure: A Comparison with Cardiac MRI - Download this document for free, or read online. Document in PDF available to download.

Purpose

Ventricular function is a powerful predictor of survival in patients with heart failure HF. However, studies characterizing gated F-18 FDG PET for the assessment of the cardiac function are rare. The aim of this study was to prospectively compare gated F-18 FDG PET and cardiac MRI for the assessment of ventricular volume and ejection fraction EF in patients with HF.

Methods

Eighty-nine patients with diagnosed HF who underwent both gated F-18 FDG PET-CT and cardiac MRI within 3 days were included in the analysis. Left ventricular LV end-diastolic volume EDV, end-systolic volume ESV, and EF were obtained from gated F-18 FDG PET-CT using the Quantitative Gated SPECT QGS and 4D-MSPECT software.

Results

LV EDV and LV ESV measured by QGS were significantly lower than those measured by cardiac MRI both P<0.0001. In contrast, the corresponding values for LV EDV for 4D-MSPECT were comparable, and LV ESV was underestimated with borderline significance compared with cardiac MRI P = 0.047. LV EF measured by QGS and cardiac MRI showed no significant differences, whereas the corresponding values for 4D-MSPECT were lower than for cardiac MRI P<0.0001. The correlations of LV EDV, LV ESV, and LV EF between gated F-18 FDG PET-CT and cardiac MRI were excellent for both QGS r = 0.92, 0.92, and 0.76, respectively and 4D-MSPECT r = 0.93, 0.94, and 0.75, respectively. However, Bland-Altman analysis revealed a significant systemic error, where LV EDV −27.9±37.0 mL and ESV −18.6±33.8 mL were underestimated by QGS.

Conclusion

Despite the observation that gated F-18 FDG PET-CT were well correlated with cardiac MRI for assessing LV function, variation was observed between the two imaging modalities, and so these imaging techniques should not be used interchangeably.



Author: Yan Li , Li Wang , Shi-Hua Zhao, Zuo-Xiang He, Dao-Yu Wang, Feng Guo, Wei Fang , Min-Fu Yang

Source: http://plos.srce.hr/



DOWNLOAD PDF




Related documents