Orazio Zoccarato1, Claudio Marcassa1, Domenico Lizio2, Lucia Leva2, Giovanni Lucignani3, Annarita Savi4, Camilla Scabbio3, Roberta Matheoud2, Michela Lecchi3, Marco Brambilla5,6. 1. Unit of Nuclear Medicine and Department of Cardiology, S. Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Scientific Institute of Veruno, Veruno, NO, Italy. 2. Departments of Medical Physics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital 'Maggiore della Carità', Novara, Italy. 3. Department of Health Sciences, University of Milan and Nuclear Medicine Unit, ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo, Milan, Italy. 4. Nuclear Medicine Department, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy. 5. Departments of Medical Physics and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital 'Maggiore della Carità', Novara, Italy. marco.brambilla@maggioreosp.novara.it. 6. Medical Physics Department, University Hospital of Novara, Novara, Italy. marco.brambilla@maggioreosp.novara.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New technologies are available in MPI. Our aim was to evaluate their impact on the uniformity of normal myocardial uptake in the polar-map representation, over different count statistics, with and without the attenuation (AC) and scatter corrections (SC). METHODS: A phantom study was performed using 5 Anger gamma cameras with filtered back projection or iterative reconstruction with resolution recovery (IRR), with or without SCAC; a D530c, with or without AC; and a D-SPECT. Count statistics ranged up to a quarter of the reference for the conventional gamma cameras and up to one half for the advanced scanners. Using polar maps, the segmental uptakes and their uncertainties, the 'global uniformity' of polar maps expressed as the coefficient of variation (COV) among the segmental uptakes and the anterior/inferior (ANT/INF) ratio were calculated. RESULTS: Both segmental uptakes and their uncertainties did not depend on the count statistics in the range studied. An increase in the segmental uptakes was found from IRR to IRR + SCAC (78.0% ± 13.5% vs 86.1% ± 9.4%; P < .0001). COV was lower for D-SPECT (10.1% ± 0.5%) and after SCAC for both conventional (9.9% ± 3.0%) and advanced systems (8.9% ± 1.7%). The ANT/INF ratio was above 1 for IRR (1.12 ± 0.07) and fell slightly below 1 for IRR + SCAC (0.97 ± 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: To compare data from the analysis of polar maps across different systems will require the adoption of specific normality databases, developed for each system and reconstruction method employed.
BACKGROUND: New technologies are available in MPI. Our aim was to evaluate their impact on the uniformity of normal myocardial uptake in the polar-map representation, over different count statistics, with and without the attenuation (AC) and scatter corrections (SC). METHODS: A phantom study was performed using 5 Anger gamma cameras with filtered back projection or iterative reconstruction with resolution recovery (IRR), with or without SCAC; a D530c, with or without AC; and a D-SPECT. Count statistics ranged up to a quarter of the reference for the conventional gamma cameras and up to one half for the advanced scanners. Using polar maps, the segmental uptakes and their uncertainties, the 'global uniformity' of polar maps expressed as the coefficient of variation (COV) among the segmental uptakes and the anterior/inferior (ANT/INF) ratio were calculated. RESULTS: Both segmental uptakes and their uncertainties did not depend on the count statistics in the range studied. An increase in the segmental uptakes was found from IRR to IRR + SCAC (78.0% ± 13.5% vs 86.1% ± 9.4%; P < .0001). COV was lower for D-SPECT (10.1% ± 0.5%) and after SCAC for both conventional (9.9% ± 3.0%) and advanced systems (8.9% ± 1.7%). The ANT/INF ratio was above 1 for IRR (1.12 ± 0.07) and fell slightly below 1 for IRR + SCAC (0.97 ± 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: To compare data from the analysis of polar maps across different systems will require the adoption of specific normality databases, developed for each system and reconstruction method employed.
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Hidetaka Nishina; Daniel S Berman; Cigdem Akincioglu; Aiden Abidov; John D Friedman; Sean W Hayes; Guido Germano Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2005 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Ernest V Garcia; Tracy L Faber; C David Cooke; Russell D Folks; Ji Chen; Cesar Santana Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jorge D Oldan; Shetal N Shah; Richard C Brunken; Frank P DiFilippo; Nancy A Obuchowski; Michael A Bolen Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Federico Caobelli; Stefano Ren Kaiser; James T Thackeray; Frank M Bengel; Matteo Chieregato; Alberto Soffientini; Claudio Pizzocaro; Giordano Savelli; Marco Galelli; Ugo Paolo Guerra Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Federico Caobelli; Muharrem Akin; James T Thackeray; Thomas Brunkhorst; Julian Widder; Georg Berding; Ina Burchert; Johann Bauersachs; Frank M Bengel Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Chuanyong Bai; Richard Conwell; Joel Kindem; Hetal Babla; Mike Gurley; Romer De Los Santos; Rex Old; Randy Weatherhead; Samia Arram; Jamshid Maddahi Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 5.952