ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2016
"Same-patient processing" for multiple cardiac SPECT studies. 2. Improving quantification repeatability.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Valve Plane Alignment on the Repeatability of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in ECG-gatedMyocard ial SPECT Using Corridor 4DM.Annals of nuclear cardiology · 2021Article
- Effects of Acquisition Matrix Size on the Accuracy and Repeatability of Parameters of Left Ventricular Function: A Phantom Study for ECG-gated Myocardial SPECT.Annals of nuclear cardiology · 2021Article
- Quantitative Clinical Nuclear Cardiology, Part 1: Established Applications.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2020Review
- Quantitative Clinical Nuclear Cardiology, Part 1: Established Applications.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2019Review
- Quantitative measurements of myocardial perfusion and function from SPECT (and PET) studies depend on the method used to perform those measurements.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018Article
- Myocardial perfusion imaging: Lessons learned and work to be done-update.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2018Review
- Cardiac imaging: working towards fully-automated machine analysis & interpretation.Expert review of medical devices · 2017Review
- Serial cardiac SPECT studies: Technical issues and clinical implications.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2016Article
- Novel SPECT Technologies and Approaches in Cardiac Imaging.Cardiovascular innovations and applications · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis paper investigates the ability of grouped quantification (an expression of the same-patient processing approach, or SPP) to improve repeatability of measurements in patients with multiple SPECT studies, and evaluates its performance compared to standard quantification in a population of 100 patients undergoing rest, stress, gated rest, and gated stress SPECT MPI. All acquisitions were performed twice, back-to-back, for a total of 800 image datasets (8 per patient).
methodsEach dataset was automatically processed (a) independently, using standard quantitative software, and (b) as a group, together with the other 7 datasets belonging to the same patient, using an SPP-modified version of the software that registered the images to one another using a downhill simplex algorithm for the search of optimal translation, rotation, and scaling parameters.
resultsOverall, grouped quantification resulted in significantly lower differences between repeated measurements of stress ungated volumes (1.40 ± 2.76 mL vs 3.33 ± 5.06 mL, P < .05), end-diastolic volumes (1.78 ± 2.78 vs 3.49 ± 5.35 mL, P < .05), end-systolic volumes (1.17 ± 1.96 vs 2.44 ± 3.35 mL, P < .05), and LVEFs (-0.45 ± 2.29% vs -1.16 ± 3.30%, P < .05). Additionally, grouped quantification produced better repeatability (lower repeatability coefficients) for stress and rest ungated volumes (5.4 vs 9.9 and 5.2 vs 13.1, respectively), stress TPD (2.6 vs 3.6), stress and rest end-diastolic volumes (5.5 vs 10.5 and 7.2 vs 14.7, respectively), stress and rest end-systolic volumes (3.8 vs 6.6 and 5.3 vs 10.3, respectively), stress and rest LVEFs (4.5 vs 6.5 and 4.7 vs 8.2, respectively), and rest total motion deficit (5.6 vs 9.6).
conclusionIt is possible to improve the repeatability of quantitative measurements of parameters of myocardial perfusion and function derived from SPECT MPI studies of a same patient by group processing of image datasets belonging to that patient. This application of the same-patient processing approach is an extension of the "paired processing" technique already described by our group, and can be performed in automated fashion through incorporation in the quantitative algorithm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.