Community Forum top_calendar.gif top_members.gif top_faq.gif top_search.gif top_home.gif    

Go Back   Community Forum > The Internet Medical Journal > News
User Name
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old June 19th, 2005, 07:42
sysadmin sysadmin is offline
Join Date: 2001
Posts: 1,085
Left ventricular dysfunction after thallium SPECT

Ischaemic related transitory left ventricular dysfunction in 201Tl gated SPECT. Del Val Gomez M, Gallardo FG, San Martin MA, Garcia A, Terol I. Department of Nuclear Medicine bDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Carlos III, Madrid, Spain. Nucl Med Commun. 2005 Jul;26(7):601-5.

OBJECTIVE: evaluate the usefulness of comparing the usefulness of the post-stress left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) compared to the rest LVEF. METHODS: METHODS: Post-stress and at-rest thallium gated SPECT was utilized in 629 consecutive patients. Standard ventricular volume values were obtained: end systolic volume, end diastolic volume, and left ventricular ejection fraction. The authors defined transitory left ventricular dysfunction as an LVEF post-stress that was not at least 5% greater than the rest LVEF. RESULTS: The post-stress LVEF averaged 64% and the rest LVEF averaged 66%. The post-stress end diastolic volume (EDV) was 142 ml and at rest was 141 ml. The post-stress end systolic volume (ESV) was 54 ml and rest ESV was 56 ml. The perfusion study results were divided into 3 categories: normal patients (group I), patients with total or partially reversible defects (group II), and patients with fixed defects (group III). In group I and group III the rest LVEF was lower than the post-exercise LVEF. In group I the rest LVEF was 75% vs a post-stress LVEF of 81%. In group III the rest LVEF was 57% compared with a post-stress LVEF of 60%. Patients in group II, however, had a rest LVEF of 66% compared with a post-stress LVEF of 64%. The left ventriuclar volumes in group I and III patients decreased with exercise. The left ventricular volumes in group II patients had an increased post-stress ESV. CONCLUSION: The post-stress LVEF was found to be higher than the rest LVEF in patients with normal perfusion or fixed defect. The post-stress LVEF is less than 5% greater than the rest LVEF in patients with reversible defects. This difference in the LVEF is primarily due to a change in the ESV. PMID: 15942480.

ncupdate 2005
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LVEF and Ventricular Volumes Obtained with QGS SPECT: Tl-201 vs Tc-99m sysadmin News 0 January 24th, 2005 12:48
American Society of Nuclear Medicine Announces Annual Meeting Poster Presentations anonymous News 0 June 4th, 2004 22:01
Measurement of Ventricular Stunning Using Gated SPECT sysadmin News 0 May 27th, 2004 04:23
Combined assessment of left ventricular perfusion and EF in risk stratification of patients with kno sysadmin News 0 March 17th, 2003 17:33
Visual assessment of regional left ventricular function from gated SPECT in risk stratification of p sysadmin News 0 March 17th, 2003 01:40

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 22:36.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint.  
- Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)

We are committed to your good health. That means that while we provide editorial medical information, we must insist that you work with your own doctor in regards to your personal health issues. All content on Medjournal.Com is strictly editorial. It constitutes medical opinion, NOT ADVICE. We do not endorse or recommend the content of or the sites that are linked FROM or TO Use common sense by consulting with your doctor before making any lifestyle changes or other medical decisions based on the content of these web pages. Medjournal.Com and the Internet Medical Journal shall not be held liable for any errors in content, advertising, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.