Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of the percent differences between MPS and MR imaging for left ventricular parameters and the percent differences of inter- and intra-observer variability for MR imaging quantification.

From: Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT underestimates left ventricular volumes and shows high variability compared to cardiac magnetic resonance imaging -- a comparison of four different commercial automated software packages

 

EDV

bias

variability

ESV

bias

variability

SV

bias

variability

EF

(% of EF)

bias

variability

QGS(*)

-34 ± 21%

‡‡‡

-22 ± 50%

§

 

-41 ± 19%

§§§

‡‡‡

§§§

‡‡‡

-9 ± 27%

§

 

ECTb(§)

-33 ± 23%

‡‡‡

‡‡

-37 ± 46%

*

 

-30 ± 30%

***

†††

‡‡‡

***

†††

6 ± 29%

*

 

MyoMetrix(†)

-30 ± 21%

‡‡‡

 

-12 ± 53%

*

§

 

-41 ± 21%

§§§

‡‡‡

§§§

‡‡‡

-15 ± 27%

*

§

 

Exini(‡)

-22 ± 17%

***

§§§

†††

*

§§

-20 ± 44%

§

 

-21 ± 29%

***

§§§

†††

***

†††

0 ± 28%

*

§

 

MR imaging

Inter-observer variability

3 ± 9%

  

4 ± 31%

  

3 ± 11%

  

0 ± 14%

  

MR imaging

Intra-observer variability

0 ± 3%

  

3 ± 12%

  

1 ± 5%

  

1 ± 5%

  
  1. Significant differences for bias and variability are shown for comparisons with QGS (*, **, ***), ECTb (§, §§, §§§), MyoMetrix (†, ††, †††) and Exini (‡, ‡‡, ‡‡‡) according to the convention *, §, †, ‡ = p < 0.05, **, §§, ††, ‡‡ = p < 0.01, and ***, §§§, †††, ‡‡‡ = p < 0.001, respectively. Data presented as mean ± 2 SD in order to illustrate the 95% limits of agreement.