首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging >Comparison of SSS and SRS calculated from normal databases provided by QPS and 4D-MSPECT manufacturers and from identical institutional normals.
【24h】

Comparison of SSS and SRS calculated from normal databases provided by QPS and 4D-MSPECT manufacturers and from identical institutional normals.

机译:比较从QPS和4D-MSPECT制造商提供的正常数据库以及从相同的机构正常水平计算得出的SSS和SRS。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

PURPOSE: There is proven evidence for the importance of myocardial perfusion-single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) with computerised determination of summed stress and rest scores (SSS/SRS) for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD). SSS and SRS can thereby be calculated semi-quantitatively using a 20-segment model by comparing tracer-uptake with values from normal databases (NDB). Four severity-degrees for SSS and SRS are normally used: <4, 4-8, 9-13, and >/=14. Manufacturers' NDBs (M-NDBs) often do not fit the institutional (I) settings. Therefore, this study compared SSS and SRS obtained with the algorithms Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS) and 4D-MSPECT using M-NDB and I-NDB. METHODS: I-NDBs were obtained using QPS and 4D-MSPECT from exercise stress data (450 MBq (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin, triple-head-camera, 30 s/view, 20 views/head) from 36 men with a low post-stress test CAD probability and visually normal SPECT findings. Patient group was 60 men showing the entire CAD-spectrum referred for routine perfusion-SPECT. Stress/rest results of automatic quantification of the 60 patients were compared to M-NDB and I-NDB. After reclassifying SSS/SRS into the four severity degrees, kappa (kappa) values were calculated to objectify agreement. RESULTS: Mean values (vs M-NDB) were 9.4 +/- 10.3 (SSS) and 5.8 +/- 9.7 (SRS) for QPS and 8.2 +/- 8.7 (SSS) and 6.2 +/- 7.8 (SRS) for 4D-MSPECT. Thirty seven of sixty SSS classifications (kappa = 0.462) and 40/60 SRS classifications (kappa = 0.457) agreed. Compared to I-NDB, mean values were 10.2 +/- 11.6 (SSS) and 6.5 +/- 10.4 (SRS) for QPS and 9.2 +/- 9.3 (SSS) and 7.2 +/- 8.6 (SRS) for 4D-MSPECT. Forty four of sixty patients agreed in SSS and SRS (kappa = 0.621 resp. 0.58). CONCLUSION: Considerable differences between SSS/SRS obtained with QPS and 4D-MSPECT were found when using M-NDB. Even using identical patients and identical I-NDB, the algorithms still gave substantial different results.
机译:目的:有证据证明心肌灌注-单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)与计算机求和应力和静息分数(SSS / SRS)的计算机确定对冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的诊断很重要。通过将示踪剂摄取与正常数据库(NDB)的值进行比较,可以使用20段模型半定量计算SSS和SRS。通常使用SSS和SRS的四个严重度等级:<4、4-8、9-13和> / = 14。制造商的NDB(M-NDB)通常不符合机构(I)设置。因此,本研究将使用M-NDB和I-NDB的定量灌注SPECT(QPS)和4D-MSPECT算法获得的SSS和SRS进行了比较。方法:使用QPS和4D-MSPECT从36名低位男性的运动压力数据(450 MBq(99m)Tc-四氟膦,三头照相机,30 s / view,20 views / head)中获得I-NDB。压力测试CAD概率和视觉正常的SPECT发现。患者组为60名男性,显示整个CAD频谱用于常规灌注SPECT。将自动定量的60位患者的应激/休息结果与M-NDB和I-NDB进行了比较。在将SSS / SRS重新分类为四个严重度等级后,计算了kappa(kappa)值以达到一致。结果:QPS的平均值(vs M-NDB)为9.4 +/- 10.3(SSS)和5.8 +/- 9.7(SRS),4D的平均值为8.2 +/- 8.7(SSS)和6.2 +/- 7.8(SRS) -MSPECT。同意了60种SSS分类中的37种(kappa = 0.462)和40/60 SRS分类(kappa = 0.457)。与I-NDB相比,QPS的平均值为10.2 +/- 11.6(SSS)和6.5 +/- 10.4(SRS),而4D-MSPECT的平均值为9.2 +/- 9.3(SSS)和7.2 +/- 8.6(SRS) 。 60名患者中有44名同意接受SSS和SRS(kappa = 0.621或0.58)。结论:当使用M-NDB时,发现QPS和4D-MSPECT获得的SSS / SRS之间存在相当大的差异。即使使用相同的患者和相同的I-NDB,该算法仍会给出明显不同的结果。

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