The Heart Institute, E. Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel.
Clin Cardiol. 2010 Mar;33(3):E56-62. doi: 10.1002/clc.20577.
Few studies including only a limited number of patients have compared left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) assessed by 2-dimensional echocardiography (2-DE) and electrocardiography-gated Tl-201 single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT).
LVEF assessment by Tl-201 gated spect is comparable with LVEF assessed by 2-DE in two different echocardiographic laboratories.
Patients (n = 402) underwent Tl-201 gated SPECT in the same laboratory and 2-DE in 2 different laboratories. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the study laboratory: group 1, at the tertiary hospital and group 2, at a community laboratory.
LVEF evaluations were similar (mean LVEF: 50.73% +/- 11.67% by 2-DE vs 50.11% +/- 11.41% by SPECT in group 1 and 57.27% +/- 7.44% by 2-DE vs 57.41% +/- 8.37% by SPECT in group 2). All LVEF measurements were highly correlated (r = 0.7, P<.001). Baseline characteristics differed between the groups, with a higher prevalence of past myocardial infarction in the in-hospital vs the community echo group (46.7% vs 22.2%, P<.01), resulting in a higher LVEF in the latter, both by 2-DE (mean 50.7% +/- 11.7% vs 57.3% +/- 7.4%, P<.01) and SPECT (50.1% +/- 11.4% vs 57.4% +/- 8.4%, P<.01).
The Tl-201 gated SPECT is a reliable clinical tool for LVEF assessment, with good correlation when compared to 2-DE. It may be routinely used as an alternative for patients with poor acoustic visualization and should be performed systematically in patients undergoing myocardial perfusion imaging with Tl-201.
仅有少数患者参与的研究比较了二维超声心动图(2-DE)和心电图门控 Tl-201 单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)评估的左心室射血分数(LVEF)。
Tl-201 门控 SPECT 评估的 LVEF 与在两个不同超声心动图实验室评估的 2-DE 相似。
患者(n=402)在同一家实验室接受 Tl-201 门控 SPECT 检查,在两家不同的实验室接受 2-DE 检查。根据研究实验室,患者被分为两组:第 1 组在三级医院,第 2 组在社区实验室。
LVEF 评估结果相似(第 1 组 2-DE 评估的平均 LVEF 为 50.73% +/- 11.67%,SPECT 评估的为 50.11% +/- 11.41%;第 2 组 2-DE 评估的平均 LVEF 为 57.27% +/- 7.44%,SPECT 评估的为 57.41% +/- 8.37%)。所有 LVEF 测量值高度相关(r=0.7,P<.001)。两组间的基线特征不同,院内超声心动图组与社区超声心动图组相比,既往心肌梗死的发生率更高(46.7% vs 22.2%,P<.01),这导致后者的 LVEF 更高,2-DE(平均 50.7% +/- 11.7% vs 57.3% +/- 7.4%,P<.01)和 SPECT(50.1% +/- 11.4% vs 57.4% +/- 8.4%,P<.01)均如此。
Tl-201 门控 SPECT 是评估 LVEF 的可靠临床工具,与 2-DE 相比具有良好的相关性。它可以作为声学可视化不良患者的常规替代方法,并且应在接受 Tl-201 心肌灌注成像的患者中系统地进行。