首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American College of Cardiology >Electrocardiogram-gated single-photon emission computed tomography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: a meta-analysis.
【24h】

Electrocardiogram-gated single-photon emission computed tomography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for the assessment of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction: a meta-analysis.

机译:心电图门控单光子发射计算机断层扫描与心脏磁共振成像相比,用于评估左心室容积和射血分数:一项荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of electrocardiogram (ECG)-gated single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) for assessment of left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV) and ejection fraction (EF) compared with the gold standard of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). BACKGROUND: Several comparisons of ECG-gated SPECT with cardiac MRI have been performed for evaluation of LV volumes and EF, but each has considered few subjects, thus leaving uncertainty about the frequency of discrepancies between the two methods. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of data on 164 subjects from nine studies comparing ECG-gated SPECT versus cardiac MRI. Data were pooled in correlation and regression analyses relating ECG-gated SPECT and cardiac MRI measurements. The frequency of discrepancies of at least 30 ml in EDV, 20 ml in ESV and 5% or 10% in EF and concordance for EF < or =40% versus >40% were determined. RESULTS: There was an overall excellent correlation between ECG-gated SPECT and cardiac MRI for EDV (r = 0.89), ESV (r = 0.92) and EF (r = 0.87). However, rates of discrepancies for individual subjects were considerable (37% [95% confidence interval [CI], 26% to 50%] for at least 30 ml in EDV; 35% [95% CI, 23% to 49%] for at least 20 ml in ESV; 52% [95% CI, 37% to 63%] for at least 5% in EF; and 23% [95% CI, 11% to 42%] for at least 10% in EF). The misclassification rate for the 40% EF cutoff was 11%. CONCLUSIONS: Electrocardiogram-gated SPECT measurements of EDV, ESV and EF show high correlation with cardiac MRI measurements, but substantial errors may occur in individual patients. Electrocardiogram-gated SPECT offers useful functional information, but cardiac MRI should be used when accurate measurement is required.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是评估心电图(ECG)门控单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)评估左心室(LV)舒张末期容积(EDV),收缩末期容积(ESV)的准确性)和射血分数(EF)与心脏磁共振成像(MRI)的金标准进行比较。背景:已对心电门控的SPECT与心脏MRI进行了几次比较,以评估左室容积和EF,但每一个都考虑的对象很少,因此两种方法之间出现差异的频率尚不确定。方法:我们对来自9项研究的164名受试者的数据进行了荟萃分析,比较了ECG门控SPECT与心脏MRI。在有关ECG门控SPECT和心脏MRI测量的相关性和回归分析中汇总数据。确定了EDV中至少30 ml,ESV中20 ml和EF中5%或10%的差异频率以及EF <或= 40%与> 40%的一致性。结果:ECG门控的SPECT与心脏MRI在EDV(r = 0.89),ESV(r = 0.92)和EF(r = 0.87)之间总体上具有良好的相关性。但是,个体受试者的差异率相当高(EDV至少30 ml为37%[95%置信区间[CI],26%至50%]; EDV为35%[95%CI,23%至49%] ESV中至少20 ml; EF中至少5%的52%[95%CI,37%至63%]; EF中至少10%的23%[95%CI,11%至42%] 。 EF截止值40%的误分类率为11%。结论:EDV,ESV和EF的心电门控SPECT测量与心脏MRI测量具有高度相关性,但个别患者可能会出现重大错误。心电图门控SPECT可提供有用的功能信息,但在需要精确测量时应使用心脏MRI。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号