Yamamuro Masaki, Tadamura Eiji, Kubo Shigeto, Toyoda Hiroshi, Nishina Takeshi, Ohba Muneo, Hosokawa Ryohei, Kimura Takeshi, Tamaki Nagara, Komeda Masashi, Kita Toru, Konishi Junji
Department of Nuclear Medicine and Diagnostic Imaging, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 54 Shogoinkawahara, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Radiology. 2005 Feb;234(2):381-90. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2342031271.
To evaluate accuracy of cardiac functional analysis with multi-detector row computed tomography (CT) and segmental reconstruction algorithm over a range of heart rates.
Institutional review board approval was obtained. Informed consent was not required. Multi-detector row CT (500-msec rotation time, 8 x 1-mm detector collimation) and magnetic resonance (MR) imaging were performed in 50 patients (28 men, 22 women; age range, 46-84 years; mean age, 67 years). Two-dimensional echocardiography was performed in 41 patients, and electrocardiographically (ECG)-gated single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) was performed in 27. End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), ejection fraction (EF), and left ventricular (LV) mass were estimated with multi-detector row CT and compared with values estimated with MR imaging, which served as the reference standard. Additionally, EF values estimated with multi-detector row CT, echocardiography, and SPECT were compared with those estimated with MR imaging. Systemic error and degree of agreement of global functional parameters measured with MR imaging and other modalities were assessed. In a second analysis, linear regression analysis was added.
EF estimated with multi-detector row CT agreed and correlated well with EF estimated with MR imaging (bias +/- standard deviation, -1.2% +/- 4.6; r = 0.96). Agreement and correlation were similar for EDV (-0.35 mL +/- 15.2; r = 0.97), ESV (1.1 mL +/- 8.6; r = 0.99), and LV mass (2.5 mL +/- 15.0; r = 0.96). Standard deviation of EF difference between multi-detector row CT and MR imaging was significantly less than that between echocardiography and MR imaging (P < .001) or that between SPECT and MR imaging (P < .001).
Various LV functional parameters were measured with multi-detector row CT with a segmental approach, and measurements correlated and agreed with those obtained with MR imaging. Moreover, functional analysis with multi-detector row CT was more accurate than that with two-dimensional echocardiography or ECG-gated SPECT.
评估多排螺旋计算机断层扫描(CT)及节段性重建算法在不同心率范围内进行心脏功能分析的准确性。
获得机构审查委员会批准,无需知情同意。对50例患者(28例男性,22例女性;年龄范围46 - 84岁;平均年龄67岁)进行了多排螺旋CT(旋转时间500毫秒,探测器准直为8×1毫米)及磁共振(MR)成像检查。41例患者进行了二维超声心动图检查,27例患者进行了心电图(ECG)门控单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)。采用多排螺旋CT估算舒张末期容积(EDV)、收缩末期容积(ESV)、射血分数(EF)及左心室(LV)质量,并与作为参考标准的MR成像所估算的值进行比较。此外,还比较了多排螺旋CT、超声心动图及SPECT估算的EF值与MR成像估算的EF值。评估了MR成像及其他检查方法测量的整体功能参数的系统误差及一致性程度。在第二项分析中,增加了线性回归分析。
多排螺旋CT估算的EF值与MR成像估算的EF值具有良好的一致性和相关性(偏差±标准差,-1.2%±4.6;r = 0.96)。EDV(-0.35毫升±15.2;r = 0.97)、ESV(1.1毫升±8.6;r = 0.99)及LV质量(2.5毫升±15.0;r = 0.96)的一致性和相关性与之相似。多排螺旋CT与MR成像之间EF差值的标准差显著小于超声心动图与MR成像之间(P <.001)或SPECT与MR成像之间(P <.001)的标准差。
采用多排螺旋CT的节段性方法测量了各种左心室功能参数,测量结果与MR成像获得的结果具有相关性和一致性。此外,多排螺旋CT的功能分析比二维超声心动图或ECG门控SPECT更准确。