Cart (Loading....) | Create Account
Close category search window
 

Evaluation of ejection fraction measurements in gated cardiac imaging using dynamic cardiac phantoms

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

4 Author(s)
Sunyoung Jang ; Dept. of Biomed. Eng., Duke Univ., Durham, NC, USA ; Jaszczak, R.J. ; Greer, K.L. ; Coleman, R.E.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEFs) obtained using gated planar imaging of dynamic cardiac phantoms and measured with a hybrid boundary detection technique. Water mixed with Tc-99m pertechnetate was used to fill the ventricles, and from 19 ml to 52 ml was added to the LV chambers at end diastole so that LVEFs of 24% to 56% were produced. Three different low energy collimators (high resolution, ultra-high resolution, and super high resolution parallel beam collimators) were evaluated. A Metz filter was used for spatial smoothing and a hybrid boundary detection algorithm was used for generating regions of interest (ROIs) in the twenty frames of images per R-R interval accumulated from 410 to 460 beats. The boundaries of the LV chambers were determined by combined first- and second-difference operators weighted by a hybrid enhancement weight α(0<α<1). The counts in the ROIs were used to calculate LVEFs. In general, the higher the value of a, the greater the deviations from actual EFs. The second-difference (α=0) method resulted in more accurate values than the first-difference (α=1) method. No large differences in the EF measurements were observed between the collimators. In the presence of background activity, the nearly optimal weight for three different collimators was α=0.5

Published in:

Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, 1994., 1994 IEEE Conference Record  (Volume:4 )

Date of Conference:

30 Oct-5 Nov 1994

Need Help?


IEEE Advancing Technology for Humanity About IEEE Xplore | Contact | Help | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | Site Map | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest professional association for the advancement of technology.
© Copyright 2014 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.