These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Assessment of four different cardiac softwares for evaluation of LVEF with CZT-SPECT vs CMR in 48 patients with recent STEMI.
    Author: Plateau A, Bouvet C, Merlin C, Pereira B, Barres B, Clerfond G, Cachin F, Cassagnes L.
    Journal: J Nucl Cardiol; 2020 Dec; 27(6):2017-2026. PubMed ID: 30426398.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare, vs CMR, four softwares: quantitative gated SPECT (QGS), myometrix (MX), corridor 4DM (4DM), and Emory toolbox (ECTb) to evaluate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), end-systolic (ESV), and end-diastolic volumes (EDVs) by gated MPI CZT-SPECT. METHODS: 48 patients underwent MPI CZT-SPECT and CMR 6 weeks after STEMI, LV parameters were measured with four softwares at MPI CZT-SPECT vs CMR. We evaluated (i) concordance and correlation between MPI CZT-SPECT and CMR, (ii) concordance MPI CZT-SPECT/CMR for the categorical evaluation of the left ventricular dysfunction, and (iii) impacts of perfusion defects > 3 segments on concordance. RESULTS: LVEF: LCC QGS/CMR = 0.81 [+ 2.2% (± 18%)], LCC MX/CMR = 0.83 [+ 1% (± 17.5%)], LCC 4DM/CMR = 0.73 [+ 3.9% (± 21%)], LCC ECTb/CMR = 0.69 [+ 6.6% (± 21.1%)]. ESV: LCC QGS/CMR = 0.90 [- 8 mL (± 40 mL)], LCC MX/CMR = 0.90 [- 9 mL (± 36 mL)], LCC 4DM/CMR = 0.89 [+ 4 mL (± 45 mL)], LCC ECTb/CMR = 0.87 [- 3 mL (± 45 mL)]. EDV: LCC QGS/CMR = 0.70 [- 16 mL (± 67 mL)], LCC MX/CMR = 0.68 [- 21 mL (± 63 mL], LCC 4DM/CMR = 0.72 [+ 9 mL (± 73 mL)], LCC ECTb/CMR = 0.69 [+ 10 mL (± 70 mL)]. CONCLUSION: QGS and MX were the two best-performing softwares to evaluate LVEF after recent STEMI.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]