-
Something wrong with this record ?
Pulse wave as an alternate signal for data synchronization during gated myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging
O. Lang, H. Trojanova, HR. Balon, I. Kunikova, M. Bilwachs, M. Penicka, M. Kaminek, M. Myslivecek,
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Electrocardiography MeSH
- Ventricular Function, Left MeSH
- Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon methods MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted MeSH
- Pulse methods MeSH
- Cardiac-Gated Imaging Techniques methods MeSH
- Stroke Volume MeSH
- Myocardial Perfusion Imaging methods MeSH
- Check Tag
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Male MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
PURPOSE: Proper identification of the cardiac cycle is essential for gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. We have developed an alternate method of ECG for gating, that is, using the peripheral pulse wave (PW) as the triggering signal for gated SPECT acquisition. The aim of this study is to compare the use of this method of gating with the standard ECG trigger. METHODS: We tested the PW triggering by comparing it with the ECG trigger. We evaluated 33 patients (25 males, 8 females), average age of 61 years (39-80) referred for stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Data from all patients were acquired twice and were processed by CEqual and QGS software. We compared the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV). Paired t test and Pearson correlation coefficient were used for comparison. RESULTS: The mean LVEF, EDV, and ESV calculated with the ECG trigger were 0.52, 120, and 64, respectively, those with the pulse-wave trigger were 0.48, 126, and 71, respectively. Mean paired difference for LVEF was -0.034 (P<0.001), for EDV 5.9 (P=0.012), and for ESV 7.9 (P<0.001). Pearson correlation coefficient for LVEF was 0.955, for EDV 0.987, and for ESV 0.991 (P<0.001 for all correlations). CONCLUSION: Triggering of gated-data acquisition by the PW is feasible. Quantitative parameters of cardiac function correlate highly with those obtained from the ECG trigger and the absolute differences are not clinically significant across a wide range of values.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc12028115
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20121206125302.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 120817s2011 xxu f 000 0#eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1097/rlu.0b013e318217aec5 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)21825844
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Lang, Otto $u Department of Nuclear Medicine, Charles University, Third Medical Faculty, Prague, Czech Republic. lang@fnkv.cz
- 245 10
- $a Pulse wave as an alternate signal for data synchronization during gated myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging / $c O. Lang, H. Trojanova, HR. Balon, I. Kunikova, M. Bilwachs, M. Penicka, M. Kaminek, M. Myslivecek,
- 520 9_
- $a PURPOSE: Proper identification of the cardiac cycle is essential for gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. We have developed an alternate method of ECG for gating, that is, using the peripheral pulse wave (PW) as the triggering signal for gated SPECT acquisition. The aim of this study is to compare the use of this method of gating with the standard ECG trigger. METHODS: We tested the PW triggering by comparing it with the ECG trigger. We evaluated 33 patients (25 males, 8 females), average age of 61 years (39-80) referred for stress myocardial perfusion imaging. Data from all patients were acquired twice and were processed by CEqual and QGS software. We compared the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV). Paired t test and Pearson correlation coefficient were used for comparison. RESULTS: The mean LVEF, EDV, and ESV calculated with the ECG trigger were 0.52, 120, and 64, respectively, those with the pulse-wave trigger were 0.48, 126, and 71, respectively. Mean paired difference for LVEF was -0.034 (P<0.001), for EDV 5.9 (P=0.012), and for ESV 7.9 (P<0.001). Pearson correlation coefficient for LVEF was 0.955, for EDV 0.987, and for ESV 0.991 (P<0.001 for all correlations). CONCLUSION: Triggering of gated-data acquisition by the PW is feasible. Quantitative parameters of cardiac function correlate highly with those obtained from the ECG trigger and the absolute differences are not clinically significant across a wide range of values.
- 650 _2
- $a srdeční akcí synchronizované zobrazovací metody $x metody $7 D055424
- 650 _2
- $a elektrokardiografie $7 D004562
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a zobrazování myokardiální perfuze $x metody $7 D055414
- 650 _2
- $a pulz $x metody $7 D011674
- 650 _2
- $a počítačové zpracování signálu $7 D012815
- 650 _2
- $a tepový objem $7 D013318
- 650 _2
- $a jednofotonová emisní výpočetní tomografie $x metody $7 D015899
- 650 _2
- $a funkce levé komory srdeční $7 D016277
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Trojanova, Helena
- 700 1_
- $a Balon, Helena R
- 700 1_
- $a Kunikova, Ivana
- 700 1_
- $a Bilwachs, Milos
- 700 1_
- $a Penicka, Martin
- 700 1_
- $a Kaminek, Milan
- 700 1_
- $a Myslivecek, Miroslav
- 773 0_
- $w MED00001147 $t Clinical nuclear medicine $x 1536-0229 $g Roč. 36, č. 9 (2011), s. 762-6
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21825844 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y m
- 990 __
- $a 20120817 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20121206125336 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 950157 $s 785461
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2011 $b 36 $c 9 $d 762-6 $i 1536-0229 $m Clinical nuclear medicine $n Clin Nucl Med $x MED00001147
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20120817/11/04