Your browser has javascript turned off or blocked. This will lead to some parts of our website to not work properly or at all. Turn on javascript for best performance.

The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Mattias Ohlsson

Mattias Ohlsson

Professor

Mattias Ohlsson

Diagnostic evaluation of three cardiac software packages using a consecutive group of patients

Author

  • Lena Johansson
  • Milan Lomsky
  • Jens Marving
  • Mattias Ohlsson
  • Sven-Eric Svensson
  • Lars Edenbrandt

Summary, in English

Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of the three software packages 4DMSPECT (4DM), Emory Cardiac Toolbox (ECTb), and Cedars Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS) for quantification of myocardial perfusion scintigram (MPS) using a large group of consecutive patients. Methods: We studied 1,052 consecutive patients who underwent 2-day stress/rest 99mTc-sestamibi MPS studies. The reference/gold-standard classifications for the MPS studies were obtained from three physicians, with more than 25 years each of experience in nuclear cardiology, who re-evaluated all MPS images. Automatic processing was carried out using 4DM, ECTb, and QPS software packages. Total stress defect extent (TDE) and summed stress score (SSS) based on a 17-segment model were obtained from the software packages. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed. Results: A total of 734 patients were classified as normal and the remaining 318 were classified as having infarction and/or ischemia. The performance of the software packages calculated as the area under the SSS ROC curve were 0.87 for 4DM, 0.80 for QPS, and 0.76 for ECTb (QPS vs. ECTb p = 0.03; other differences p < 0.0001). The area under the TDE ROC curve were 0.87 for 4DM, 0.82 for QPS, and 0.76 for ECTb (QPS vs. ECTb p = 0.0005; other differences p < 0.0001). Conclusion: There are considerable differences in performance between the three software packages with 4DM showing the best performance and ECTb the worst. These differences in performance should be taken in consideration when software packages are used in clinical routine or in clinical studies.

Department/s

  • Computational Biology and Biological Physics
  • Clinical Physiology (Lund)

Publishing year

2011

Language

English

Pages

1-7

Publication/Series

EJNMMI Research

Volume

1

Issue

1

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

BioMed Central (BMC)

Topic

  • Cardiac and Cardiovascular Systems

Keywords

  • Automatic quantification
  • Coronary artery disease
  • Myocardial perfusion imaging
  • Software
  • SPECT

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 2191-219X