Original Article
Comparison of three commercially available softwares for measuring left ventricular perfusion and function by gated SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-014-9885-5Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

The three softwares, Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS), Emory Cardiac Toolbox, and 4 Dimension-Myocardial SPECT (4DM) are widely used with myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) to determine perfusion defect size (PDS) and left ventricular (LV) function. There are limited data on the degree of agreement between these methods in quantifying the LV perfusion pattern and function.

Methods and Results

In 120 consecutive patients who had abnormal regadenoson SPECT MPI with a visually derived summed stress score ≥4, the correlation between the softwares for measurements of PDS, reversible, and fixed defects was poor to fair (Spearman’s ρ = 0.18-0.72). Overall, estimation of defect size was smaller by QPS and larger by 4DM. There was discordance among the softwares in 62% of the cases in defining PDS as small/moderate/large. The correlation between the softwares was better for measuring LVEF, volumes and mass (ρ = 0.84-0.97), and discrepant results for defining normal/mild-moderate/severe LV systolic dysfunction were prevalent in 28% of the patients.

Conclusion

There are significant differences between the softwares in measuring PDS as well as LV function, and more importantly in defining small, moderate, or large ischemic burden. These results suggest the necessity of using the same software when assessing interval changes by serial imaging.

Introduction

ECG-gated myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with single-photon emission-computed tomography (SPECT) is the most widely used imaging modality in the diagnosis and risk assessment of patients with ischemic heart disease.1, 2, 3 MPI generates information on myocardial perfusion [reversible defects (ischemia) and fixed defects (scar)], left ventricle (LV) ejection fraction (EF), volumes, mass, regional wall motion, and thickening. The visual interpretation of MPI is dependent on observer’s expertise and is less reproducible than automated methods.4,5 There are three widely used commercial softwares for automated measurements; Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA), Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA), and 4 Dimension-Myocardial SPECT (4DM, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA).

Several studies have demonstrated that the above mentioned softwares have a strong correlation with each other, and with an independent “gold standard” in estimating LV function and volumes.6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 In contrast, there are limited data on the degree of agreement between these programs in assessing perfusion abnormalities,5,14, 15, 16 and no data regarding agreement of the three softwares in measuring perfusion defect size (PDS) and the size of reversible perfusion defects using polar maps.

The aim of this study was to examine the correlation and agreement between the three programs in assessing PDS, and reversible defect size (by polar maps) as well as LVEF, end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), and mass.

Section snippets

Study Population

Data were collected from 120 consecutive patients who had abnormal regadenoson MPI with a visual SSS ≥4 performed between July and September 2008 at University of Alabama at Birmingham Medical Center. All studies were performed using a stress/rest sestamibi protocol, in which MPI data were acquired without attenuation correction. The Institutional Review Board for Human Research at the University of Alabama at Birmingham approved this study.

Imaging Protocol

SPECT images were acquired and processed using

Results

A total of 120 consecutive patients were included in the study. The baseline characteristics of the patients are detailed in Table 1 and are significant for the presence of multiple co-morbidities with a large proportion receiving multiple cardiac medications.

The inter-observer reproducibility of the results was strong for all variables measured using each of the softwares. The ICC ranged from 0.86 to 1.0 for assessment of LVEF, volumes, and mass, and from 0.94 to 0.99 for assessment of PDS

Discussion

An important finding from our study is that for the assessment of PDS and reversible perfusion defects (fixed defects are derived as PDS-reversible defects), the correlation between QPS, ECTb, and 4DM is poor to fair. For measurement of PDS, QPS exhibited a systematic bias toward lower values and 4DM toward higher values. For measurement of reversible defect size, 4DM showed a systematic bias toward higher values than the other two programs. For assessment of LV volumes and function, there was

Conclusions

Although the three softwares produce highly reproducible results for automated measurements of PDS and reversible perfusion defects, the correlation between the softwares is only fair to poor. Importantly, the softwares provided discrepant results for important end-points of moderate to severe PDS and reversible perfusion defect, in a large proportion of patients. The softwares provided discrepant results in a smaller, but still clinically significant, proportion of patients for assessment of

New Knowledge Gained

There is significant discordance among the three widely used commercial softwares in assessing PDS. This discordance is due to systematic bias and significant random error. In contrast, there is strong correlation between the softwares for assessment of LV size and function. Further, there is significant discordance among the softwares in categorizing perfusion defects into small, moderate or large. The corresponding discordance in categorizing LVEF into normal, mild-moderate and severe

Conflict of interest

The authors have indicated that they have no financial conflict of interest.

Disclosure

Dr Iskandrian is a scientific advisor for Rapidscan, Pharma and has received research grants from Astellas Pharma USA. Dr Hage is a scientific advisor for Astellas Pharma USA and has received investigator-initiated grant support from Astellas Pharma USA. The other authors report no financial disclosures.

References (32)

  • SlomkaPJ et al.

    Simplified normal limits and automated quantitative assessment for attenuation-corrected myocardial perfusion SPECT

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (2006)
  • Chrysanthou-BaustertI et al.

    Diagnostic sensitivity of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging using a pumping cardiac phantom with inserted variable defects

    J Nucl Cardiol

    (2013)
  • HachamovitchR et al.

    Value of stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography in patients with normal resting electrocardiograms: An evaluation of incremental prognostic value and cost-effectiveness

    Circulation

    (2002)
  • AkessonL et al.

    Operator dependent variability in quantitative analysis of myocardial perfusion images

    Clin Physiol Funct Imaging

    (2004)
  • KakhkiVR et al.

    Comparison of two software in gated myocardial perfusion single photon emission tomography, for the measurement of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction, in patients with and without perfusion defects

    Hell J Nucl Med

    (2007)
  • LumDP et al.

    Comparison of automatic quantification software for the measurement of ventricular volume and ejection fraction in gated myocardial perfusion SPECT

    Nucl Med Commun

    (2003)
  • Cited by (24)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    See related editorials, doi: 10.1007/s12350-014-9874-8 and doi: 10.1007/s12350-014-9875-7.

    Sameer Ather and Fahad Iqbal have contributed equally to this manuscript.

    View full text