Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of the National Medical Association logoLink to Journal of the National Medical Association
. 2007 Nov;99(11):1227-8, 1231-4.

Comparison and co-relation of invasive and noninvasive methods of ejection fraction measurement.

Darshan Godkar 1, Kalyan Bachu 1, Bijal Dave 1, Robert Megna 1, Selva Niranjan 1, Ashok Khanna 1
PMCID: PMC2574320  PMID: 18020097

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accurate estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) has assumed great significance in the era of automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillators (AICDs), and a low EF may be one of the sole deciding factor in determining AICD implantation in certain patient populations. AIM: There are various methods, invasive and noninvasive, which can help calculate EF. We sought to conduct a retrospective study comparing EF estimation by invasive (angiography) and noninvasive methods [MUGA (multiple-gated acquisition), echocardiography (echo), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)] in 5,558 patients in our hospital from 1995-2004. METHODS AND RESULTS: EF was estimated by > or = 1 method (angiography, MUGA, echo, SPECT) within a one-month period. Values for the four tests in 5,558 patients were as follows: angiography mean 46.2, range 20-75, standard deviation (SD) 13.1; MUGA mean 45.7, range 20-70, SD 11.6; echo mean 45.7, range 22-70, SD 11.2; and SPECT mean 54.4, range 30-75, SD 11.9. Excellent positive correlations were found among all four tests as follows: angiography and MUGA, correlation coefficient (r) = 0.97, angiography and echo r = 0.96, angiography and SPECT r = 0.94, MUGA and echo r = 0.97, MUGA and SPECT r = 0.94, and echo and SPECT r = 0.94. Values for SPECT were significantly higher than for angiography, echo and MUGA (p < 0.001). The arithmetic difference between angiography and MUGA (mean 0.50, range -5.0-5.0) and the arithmetic difference between angiography and echo (mean 0.52, range -5.0-15.0) were similar (p = 0.59). The arithmetic difference between SPECT and angiography (mean 8.2, range -15.0-20.0) was significantly larger than the arithmetic difference between angiography and echo (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: All the four methods used to estimate EF corelate well with each other. However, values estimated during stress testing by SPECT overestimate EF and are significantly higher as compared to MUGA, echo and angiography. Estimation of EF by MUGA, echo or angiography should be preferred over SPECT, especially when that patient warrants intervention. We conclude that the overestimation of EF by SPECT may deprive some deserving patients of the survival benefit afforded by ICD.

Full text

PDF
1227

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Abidov Aiden, Germano Guido, Hachamovitch Rory, Berman Daniel S. Gated SPECT in assessment of regional and global left ventricular function: major tool of modern nuclear imaging. J Nucl Cardiol. 2006 Mar-Apr;13(2):261–279. doi: 10.1007/BF02971251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Berk Fatma, Isgoren Serkan, Demir Hakan, Kozdag Guliz, Sahin Tayfun, Ural Dilek, Kahraman Göksel. Assessment of left ventricular function and volumes for patients with dilated cardiomyopathy using gated myocardial perfusion SPECT and comparison with echocardiography. Nucl Med Commun. 2005 Aug;26(8):701–710. doi: 10.1097/01.mnm.0000170938.98581.14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Boriani G., Biffi M., Martignani C., Branzi A. Defibrillatori impiantabili e prevenzione della morte improvvisa: implicazioni cliniche ed economiche alla luce dello studio MADIT II. Monaldi Arch Chest Dis. 2002 Sep;58(2):145–150. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chua T., Yin L. C., Thiang T. H., Choo T. B., Ping D. Z., Leng L. Y. Accuracy of the automated assessment of left ventricular function with gated perfusion SPECT in the presence of perfusion defects and left ventricular dysfunction: correlation with equilibrium radionuclide ventriculography and echocardiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2000 Jul-Aug;7(4):301–311. doi: 10.1067/mnc.2000.105279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Deedwania Prakash C. The key to unraveling the mystery of mortality in heart failure: an integrated approach. Circulation. 2003 Apr 8;107(13):1719–1721. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000014688.12415.C0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Everaert H., Bossuyt A., Franken P. R. Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes from gated single photon emission tomographic myocardial perfusion images: comparison between two algorithms working in three-dimensional space. J Nucl Cardiol. 1997 Nov-Dec;4(6):472–476. doi: 10.1016/s1071-3581(97)90004-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ford P. V., Chatziioannou S. N., Moore W. H., Dhekne R. D. Overestimation of the LVEF by quantitative gated SPECT in simulated left ventricles. J Nucl Med. 2001 Mar;42(3):454–459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Gayed Isis, Cid Emma, Boccalandero Fernando, Podoloff Donald. Factors affecting left ventricular ejection fraction using automated quantitative gated SPECT. Clin Nucl Med. 2003 Apr;28(4):290–295. doi: 10.1097/01.RLU.0000057570.37612.C4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Germano G., Kiat H., Kavanagh P. B., Moriel M., Mazzanti M., Su H. T., Van Train K. F., Berman D. S. Automatic quantification of ejection fraction from gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1995 Nov;36(11):2138–2147. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gheorghiade M., Bonow R. O. Chronic heart failure in the United States: a manifestation of coronary artery disease. Circulation. 1998 Jan 27;97(3):282–289. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.97.3.282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Glatter Kathryn A., Young J. Nilas, McElvany Matthew D. Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a new preventive medical option. Prev Cardiol. 2006 Winter;9(1):49–55. doi: 10.1111/j.1520-037x.2006.3647.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Grimm W., Glaveris C., Hoffmann J., Menz V., Mey N., Born S., Maisch B. Noninvasive arrhythmia risk stratification in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: design and first results of the Marburg Cardiomyopathy Study. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 1998 Nov;21(11 Pt 2):2551–2556. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8159.1998.tb01217.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Grimm Wolfram, Christ Michael, Bach Jennifer, Müller Hans-Helge, Maisch Bernhard. Noninvasive arrhythmia risk stratification in idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy: results of the Marburg Cardiomyopathy Study. Circulation. 2003 Nov 17;108(23):2883–2891. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000100721.52503.85. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Habash-Bseiso Dana E., Rokey Roxann, Berger Charles J., Weier Andrew W., Chyou Po-Huang. Accuracy of noninvasive ejection fraction measurement in a large community-based clinic. Clin Med Res. 2005 May;3(2):75–82. doi: 10.3121/cmr.3.2.75. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kadish Alan, Dyer Alan, Daubert James P., Quigg Rebecca, Estes N. A. Mark, Anderson Kelley P., Calkins Hugh, Hoch David, Goldberger Jeffrey, Shalaby Alaa. Prophylactic defibrillator implantation in patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med. 2004 May 20;350(21):2151–2158. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa033088. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kasai Tokuo, Depuey E. Gordon, Shah Arshad Ali. Compared with 3-dimensional analysis, 2-dimensional gated SPECT analysis overestimates left ventricular ejection fraction in patients with regional dyssynchrony. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004 Mar-Apr;11(2):159–164. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclcard.2003.11.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Kondo Chisato, Fukushima Kenji, Kusakabe Kiyoko. Measurement of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by quantitative gated SPET, contrast ventriculography and magnetic resonance imaging: a meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 Apr 4;30(6):851–858. doi: 10.1007/s00259-003-1146-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kumita S., Cho K., Nakajo H., Toba M., Uwamori M., Mizumura S., Kumazaki T., Sano J., Sakai S., Munakata K. Assessment of left ventricular diastolic function with electrocardiography-gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: comparison with multigated equilibrium radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2001 Sep-Oct;8(5):568–574. doi: 10.1067/mnc.2001.116853. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lum D. P., Coel M. N. Comparison of automatic quantification software for the measurement of ventricular volume and ejection fraction in gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. Nucl Med Commun. 2003 Mar;24(3):259–266. doi: 10.1097/00006231-200303000-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. MacCarthy Philip A., Kearney Mark T., Nolan James, Lee Amanda J., Prescott Robin J., Shah Ajay M., Brooksby W. Paul, Fox Keith A. A. Prognosis in heart failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2003 Jul 12;327(7406):78–79. doi: 10.1136/bmj.327.7406.78. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Manrique A., Koning R., Cribier A., Véra P. Effect of temporal sampling on evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction by means of thallium-201 gated SPET: comparison of 16- and 8-interval gating, with reference to equilibrium radionuclide angiography. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000 Jun;27(6):694–699. doi: 10.1007/s002590050564. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Nakajima K., Higuchi T., Taki J., Kawano M., Tonami N. Accuracy of ventricular volume and ejection fraction measured by gated myocardial SPECT: comparison of 4 software programs. J Nucl Med. 2001 Oct;42(10):1571–1578. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Nichols K., Lefkowitz D., Faber T., Folks R., Cooke D., Garcia E. V., Yao S. S., DePuey E. G., Rozanski A. Echocardiographic validation of gated SPECT ventricular function measurements. J Nucl Med. 2000 Aug;41(8):1308–1314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Nichols K., Lefkowitz D., Faber T., Folks R., Cooke D., Garcia E. V., Yao S. S., DePuey E. G., Rozanski A. Echocardiographic validation of gated SPECT ventricular function measurements. J Nucl Med. 2000 Aug;41(8):1308–1314. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Patel Chetan D., Nadig Murali R., Kurien Sumodh, Barai Sukanta, Narang Rajeev, Malhotra Arun. Left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes on rest gated 201Tl perfusion SPECT: comparison with two-dimensional echocardiography. Nucl Med Commun. 2006 May;27(5):425–429. doi: 10.1097/00006231-200605000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Sanz G., Castañer A., Betriu A., Magriña J., Roig E., Coll S., Paré J. C., Navarro-López F. Determinants of prognosis in survivors of myocardial infarction: a prospective clinical angiographic study. N Engl J Med. 1982 May 6;306(18):1065–1070. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198205063061801. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Starling M. R., Crawford M. H., Henry R. L., Lembo N. J., Kennedy G. T., O'Rourke R. A. Prognostic value of electrocardiographic exercise testing and noninvasive assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction soon after acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1986 Mar 1;57(8):532–537. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(86)90830-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Tadamura E., Kudoh T., Motooka M., Inubushi M., Shirakawa S., Hattori N., Okada T., Matsuda T., Koshiji T., Nishimura K. Assessment of regional and global left ventricular function by reinjection T1-201 and rest Tc-99m sestamibi ECG-gated SPECT: comparison with three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Mar 15;33(4):991–997. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(98)00661-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Tak Tahir. Ejection fraction derived by noninvasive modalities versus left ventricular angiographic determination. Clin Med Res. 2005 May;3(2):61–62. doi: 10.3121/cmr.3.2.61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Theal Michael, Demers Catherine, McKelvie Robert S. The role of angiotensin II receptor blockers in the treatment of heart failure patients. Congest Heart Fail. 2003 Jan-Feb;9(1):29–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-7133.2003.tb00019.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Vourvouri E. C., Poldermans D., Bax J. J., Sianos G., Sozzi F. B., Schinkel A. F., de Sutter J., Parcharidis G., Valkema R., Roelandt J. R. Evaluation of left ventricular function and volumes in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy: gated single-photon emission computed tomography versus two-dimensional echocardiography. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001 Nov;28(11):1610–1615. doi: 10.1007/s002590100624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Williams K. A., Taillon L. A. Left ventricular function in patients with coronary artery disease assessed by gated tomographic myocardial perfusion images. Comparison with assessment by contrast ventriculography and first-pass radionuclide angiography. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Jan;27(1):173–181. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00413-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Yoshioka J., Hasegawa S., Yamaguchi H., Tokita N., Paul A. K., Xiuli M., Maruyama A., Hori M., Nishimura T. Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction calculated from quantitative electrocardiographic-gated 99mTc-tetrofosmin myocardial SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1999 Oct;40(10):1693–1698. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Yoshioka J., Hasegawa S., Yamaguchi H., Tokita N., Paul A. K., Xiuli M., Maruyama A., Hori M., Nishimura T. Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction calculated from quantitative electrocardiographic-gated 99mTc-tetrofosmin myocardial SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1999 Oct;40(10):1693–1698. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of the National Medical Association are provided here courtesy of National Medical Association

RESOURCES