Iakovou Ioannis, Karatzas Nikolaos, Oikonomidis Dimitrios, Psarakou Anna
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Papageorgiou Hospital, N. Efkarpia, 564 03 Thessaloniki, Macedonia, Greece.
Hell J Nucl Med. 2005 Sep-Dec;8(3):191-9.
Our aim was to evaluate right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients with chronic pulmonary disease (CPD) during a standard 99mTc-isonitrilium myocardial perfusion study. Forty patients (14 women and 26 men, mean age 67.7 +/- 7 years old) suffering from CPD enrolled in this study. Patients were consecutively submitted to: a) First pass (FP) angiocardiography with 99mTc (Tauc-FP). b) Multigated angiocardiography (MUGA). c) FP with 99mTc-sestamibi (MIBI-FP). d) Gated FP (MIBI-gFP) and GatedSPECT was performed in 23 patients. A simple SPECT study was performed to the rest of them. Our results showed: For the RV: RVEF measured by each method: Tauc-FP =49.09+/-8.4%, MUGA =48.51+/-10.6%, MIBI-FP =49.45+/-7.8 % and MIBI-gFP =52.49+/-6.05%. No difference among these methods was noted (P=0.674). MIBI-FP ejection fraction range was wider than MIBI-gFP and narrower than MUGA. A strong correlation (r=0.88 P<0.01) and good agreement was found between MIBI-gFP and MIBI-FP. Less strong correlation was estimated between not only Tc-FP and MUGA (r=0.76 P<0.01) but MIBI-FP and MUGA (r=0.68 P<0.01) as well with no sufficient agreement. For the LV: LVEF was also measured by each method: Tauc-FP=61,1+/-8,5%, MUGA=61,2+/-10%, MIBI-FP=61,8+/-6%,EF GSPECT=60,2+/-7%. There was a strong correlation (r=0.87 P<0.01) with good agreement between Tauc-FP and MUGA. For all patients, correlation between MIBI-FP and GSPECT was weak (r=0.62 P<0.01) but ameliorated by the exclusion of 4 patients with small end diastolic volumes (EDV) (r=0.82 P<0.01). The correlation between MUGA and GSPECT got stronger (r=0.85 P<0.01) by the same exclusion. Finally, a strong correlation (r=0.81 P<0.01) with sufficient agreement was noted between MIBI-FP and MUGA.
For the RV: simple or gated FP are reliable with good agreement methods of RVEF evaluation in patients with CPD that can easily be performed during every radionuclide isonitrilium myocardial perfusion study. MUGA is proved to be comparative to the FP estimation of RV EF. The gFP affords the narrowest range of RVEF calculated, allowing the more accurate functional identification of RV borders. For the LV: FP (with 99mTc or with sestamibi-99mTc) is a reliable method of LVEF measurement in patients with CPD when compared with MUGA. MuIotaBetaIota-FP can evaluate LVEF during a standard myocardial perfusion study with radionuclide isonitrilium. GSPECT-EF correlation with EF measured by MUGA or FP is strongly affected by EDV.
我们的目的是在标准的99mTc - 异腈心肌灌注研究中评估慢性肺部疾病(CPD)患者的右心室射血分数(RVEF)和左心室射血分数(LVEF)。40例CPD患者(14名女性和26名男性,平均年龄67.7±7岁)纳入本研究。患者依次接受:a)用99mTc进行首次通过(FP)心血管造影(Tauc - FP)。b)多门控心血管造影(MUGA)。c)用99mTc - sestamibi进行FP(MIBI - FP)。d)门控FP(MIBI - gFP),23例患者进行了门控单光子发射计算机断层显像(GatedSPECT)。其余患者进行了简单的单光子发射计算机断层显像(SPECT)研究。我们的结果显示:对于右心室:通过每种方法测量的RVEF:Tauc - FP = 49.09±8.4%,MUGA = 48.51±10.6%,MIBI - FP = 49.45±7.8%,MIBI - gFP = 52.49±6.05%。这些方法之间未发现差异(P = 0.674)。MIBI - FP射血分数范围比MIBI - gFP宽,比MUGA窄。MIBI - gFP与MIBI - FP之间发现强相关性(r = 0.88,P < 0.01)且一致性良好。不仅Tc - FP与MUGA(r = 0.76,P < 0.01)之间,而且MIBI - FP与MUGA(r = 0.68,P < 0.01)之间的相关性较弱,且一致性不足。对于左心室:也通过每种方法测量LVEF:Tauc - FP = 61.1±8.5%,MUGA = 61.2±10%,MIBI - FP = 61.8±6%,EF GSPECT = 60.2±7%。Tauc - FP与MUGA之间存在强相关性(r = 0.87,P < 0.01)且一致性良好。对于所有患者,MIBI - FP与GSPECT之间的相关性较弱(r = 0.62,P < 0.01),但排除4例舒张末期容积(EDV)较小的患者后有所改善(r = 0.82,P < 0.01)。通过相同的排除,MUGA与GSPECT之间的相关性增强(r = 0.85,P < 0.01)。最后,MIBI - FP与MUGA之间存在强相关性(r = 0.81,P < 0.01)且一致性充分。
对于右心室:简单或门控FP是评估CPD患者RVEF的可靠且一致性良好的方法,可在每次放射性核素异腈心肌灌注研究中轻松进行。事实证明,MUGA与右心室EF的FP估计值具有可比性。门控FP计算出的RVEF范围最窄,能更准确地对右心室边界进行功能识别。对于左心室:与MUGA相比,FP(用99mTc或用99mTc - sestamibi)是测量CPD患者LVEF的可靠方法。在标准的放射性核素异腈心肌灌注研究中,MIBI - FP可评估LVEF。GSPECT - EF与通过MUGA或FP测量的EF之间的相关性受EDV的强烈影响。