门控心肌灌注显像不同定量分析软件测定左心室运动功能的比较  

Comparison of Left Ventricular Function Evaluation Using Gated Myocardial Perfusion Imaging with Different Software of Quantitative Analysis

作　　者：曾宇[1] 蒋丽莎[1] 周丽娜[1] 杨晓川[1] 周绿漪[1] 

机构地区：[1]四川大学华西医院核医学科,成都610041

出　　处：《生物医学工程学杂志》2013年第6期1239-1243,共5页Journal of Biomedical Engineering

摘　　要：以左心室造影(LVG)为参考标准,探讨定量四维模型心肌断层显像(4D-MSPECT)和门控心肌断层显像(QGS)定量分析软件测算左心室舒张末期容积(EDV)、收缩末期容积(ESV)和射血分数(EF)的准确性。回顾性分析2008年12月~2011年6月于四川大学华西医院行静息门控心肌灌注显像(G-MPI)的患者,G-MPI检查后30d内受检者需行左心室造影检查,分别采用4D-MSPECT和QGS软件计算EDV、ESV和EF值。共85例患者纳入分析,其中男性47例,女性38例,年龄(57±13)岁。两种门控定量分析软件计算所得左心室运动功能与LVG计算值相关性较好,相关系数分别为:EDV,r=0.89(4D-MSPECT),r=0.81(QGS);ESV,r=0.97(4D-MSPECT),r=0.95(QGS);EF,r=0.95(4D-MSPECT),r=0.93(QGS)。对于EDV、4D-MSPECT和QGS测得值均较LVG低[(125±20)mL(4D-MSPECT),(118±39)mL(QGS),(131±33)mL(LVG)]。对于ESV、4D-MSPECT和QGS测算值与LVG无显著差异[(47±32)mL(4D-MSPECT),(53±29)mL(QGS),(49±37)mL(LVG)]。对于LVEF,QGS测算值低于LVG[61%±21%(4D-MSPECT),55%±17%(QGS),63%±19%(LVG)]。4DMSPECT和QGS门控定量分析软件所测得的EDV、ESV及EF值与左心室造影法所测值相关性较好,但存在一定差异。本研究结果表明,应针对不同的门控定量分析软件,建立相对应的正常值参考范围。In the present study, the accuracy of the 4-dimensional model single photon emission computed tomography （4D-MSPECT） and quantitative gated single photon emission computed tomography （QGS） was investigated for as- sessing left ventricular end-diastolic （EDV）, end-systolic volume （ESV） and ejection fraction （EF） from gated myo- cardial perfusion imaging （C^MPI） using left ventriculography （LVG） as reference. From December 2008 to June 2011,85 patients, who underwent rest G-MPI and LVG （within 30 days） in West China Hospital, Sichuan Universi- ty, were retrospectively recruited. EDV, ESV, and EF were calculated from G-MPI using 4D-MSPECT and QGS. Eighty-five patients （47 men, 38 women; age 57--! 13 years） were finally analyzed. Correlation between results of G- MPI and LVG was high for EDV, r = 0.89 （4D^MSPECT）, r = 0.81 （QGS） ESV, r = 0. 97 （ 4D-MSPECT）, R = 0.95 （QGS） EF, r= 0.95 （4D-MSPECT）, r= 0.9a （QGS）. 4D-MSPECT and QGS underestimated EDV significant- ly compared with LVG [（125~20）mL （4D-MSPECT）, （118~39）mL（QGS）, （131＋_33）mL （LVG）]. The ESV, 4D-MSPECT and QGS values did not differ significantly from LVG [（47~ 32）mL （4D-MSPECT）, （53~ 29）mL （QGS）, （49~37）mL （LVG）]. For LVEF, only QGS yielded values were significantly lower than LVG [61% ! 21~ （4D-MSPECT）, 55%~17% （QGS）, and 63% ±19% （LVG）]. EDV, ESV, and EF as determined by4D MSPECT and QGS from G-MPI agree well with relevant values with LVG. However, Algorithm-inherent also showed slightly over- or under-estimation of volumes. Therefore, separated normal databases should be set up for each algorithm.

关 键 词：门控心肌灌注显像 左室容积 射血分数 

分 类 号：R817.4[医药卫生—影像医学与核医学] R445.5[医药卫生—放射医学]