| Literature DB >> 28639254 |
Tadaki Nakahara1, Hiromitsu Daisaki2, Yasushi Yamamoto3, Takashi Iimori4, Kazuyuki Miyagawa5, Tomoya Okamoto6, Yoshiki Owaki7,8, Nobuhiro Yada3, Koichi Sawada4, Ryotaro Tokorodani5, Masahiro Jinzaki7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although quantitative analysis using standardized uptake value (SUV) becomes realistic in clinical single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography (SPECT/CT) imaging, reconstruction parameter settings can deliver different quantitative results among different SPECT/CT systems. This study aims to propose a use of the digital reference object (DRO), which is a National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) phantom-like object developed by the Quantitative Imaging Biomarker Alliance (QIBA) fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography technical committee, for the purpose of harmonizing SUVs in Tc-99m SPECT/CT imaging.Entities:
Keywords: Harmonization; Multicenter study; SPECT/CT; SUV
Year: 2017 PMID: 28639254 PMCID: PMC5479776 DOI: 10.1186/s13550-017-0300-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: EJNMMI Res Impact factor: 3.138
Fig. 1Correlation of Tc-99m concentration of the NEMA phantom and counting rate in Discovery NM/CT 670 from the beginning (A) to the end (B) of the SPECT scan. There was a linear relationship between the radioactivity and counting rate. Tc-99m concentration for further phantom study was determined based on the counting rate of clinical bone SPECT/CT
Imaging conditions and collimator configurations regarding the four state-of-the-art SPECT/CT systems
| Brightview XCT | Discovery NM/CT 670 | Infinia Hawkeye 4 | Symbia T6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Imaging condition | ||||
| Step and shoot image acquisition | ||||
| No. of step | 30 | 30 | 30 | 30 |
| Rotation angle | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |
| No. of projection | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 |
| Scan orbit | body contour | body contour | body contour | body contour |
| Size for image acquisition | ||||
| Matrix ( | 132, 132, 132 | 128, 128, 128 | 128, 128, 128 | 128, 128, 128 |
| Pixel size and slice thickness (mm) | 4.7 | 4.4 | 4.4 | 4.8 |
| Smoothing filter | 3D Gaussian | 3D Gaussian | 3D Gaussian | 3D Gaussian |
| Reconstructed image for ROI analysis | ||||
| Matrix ( | 256, 256, 203 | 256, 256, 207 | 256, 256, 130 | 256, 256, 187 |
| Pixel size and slice thickness (mm) | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 2.0 |
| Energy window | ||||
| Main | 140.5 keV ± 10% | 140.5 keV ± 10% | 140 keV ± 10% | 140 keV ± 10% |
| Sub | N.A. | 120 keV ± 5% | 120 keV ± 5% | 120 keV ± 5% |
| Attenuation correction | CT-based | CT-based | CT-based | CT-based |
| Scatter correction | ESSE | DEW | DEW | DEW |
| Collimator | ||||
| Type | CHR | LEHR | LEHR | LEHR |
| No. of holes (thousand) | 40.2 | 86.3 | 86.3 | 148 |
| Hole shape | Hexagon | Hexagon | Hexagon | Hexagon |
| Hole length (mm) | 48 | 35 | 35 | 24.1 |
| Septal thickness (mm) | 0.15 | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.16 |
| Hole diameter across the flats (mm) | 2.03 | 1.50 | 1.50 | 1.11 |
ESSE effective source scatter estimation method. DEW dual-energy window method, CHR cardiac high-resolution collimator, LEHR low-energy high-resolution collimator, N.A. not applicable
Fig. 2a Phantom configuration of a digital reference object (DRO) and b DRO filtered by a 17-mm Gaussian filter (DRO17 mm). The square boxes in DRO are by design (not used in the present study)
SUV values derived from a digital reference object smoothed by a 17-mm Gaussian filter (DRO17 mm)
| Quantitative metrics | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Quantitative metrics | |||
| SUVmean | SUVpeak | SUVmax | |
| Sphere diameter (mm) | |||
| 10 | 1.18 | 1.17 | 1.20 |
| 13 | 1.36 | 1.38 | 1.42 |
| 17 | 1.67 | 1.77 | 1.86 |
| 22 | 2.12 | 2.40 | 2.53 |
| 28 | 2.55 | 3.14 | 3.29 |
| 37 | 2.94 | 3.82 | 3.91 |
Reconstruction conditions according to the manufacturers’ recommendation or the policies of their own departments
| SPECT/CT scanner | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrightView | Discovery | Infinia | Symbia | |
| Reconstruction parameter | ||||
| Subset | 8 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Iteration | 10 | 10 | 10 | 10 |
| Filter | Gaussian | Gaussian | Gaussian | Gaussian |
| Cutoff value | 15 mm | 2.5 pixel | 2.5 pixel | 9 mm |
| Resolution recovery | Astonish | Evolution | Evolution | FLASH 3D |
| SUVmean of the spheres | ||||
| 10 mm | 1.08 | 1.25 | 0.98 | 1.06 |
| 13 mm | 1.14 | 1.48 | 1.28 | 1.37 |
| 17 mm | 1.38 | 1.73 | 1.73 | 1.99 |
| 22 mm | 1.81 | 2.19 | 1.92 | 2.52 |
| 28 mm | 2.41 | 2.96 | 2.42 | 3.08 |
| 37 mm | 2.86 | 3.21 | 2.71 | 3.50 |
| RMSE | 0.20 | 0.20 | 0.13 | 0.40 |
Distribution of BCF among SPECT/CT systems with different reconstruction conditions
| SPECT/CT scanner | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BrightView | Discoverya | Infiniaa | Symbia | |
| Mean | 5309 | 1617 | 1538 | 4914 |
| Standard deviation | 35 | 5 | 48 | 32 |
| Relative standard deviation (%) | 0.7 | 0.3 | 3.1 | 0.7 |
aA scaling factor is involved with the values
Fig. 3The root mean square error (RMSE) in SUVmean of the six spheres between DRO17 mm and actual phantom images obtained with the SPECT/CT cameras
Fig. 4Inter-scanner variability in standardized uptake values (SUVs) a–c before and d–f after harmonization
Coefficient of variations (COVs) of SUVs between the four SPECT/CT systems
| Pre-harmonization | Post-harmonization | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spheres | SUVmean | SUVpeak | SUVmax | SUVmean | SUVpeak | SUVmax |
| 10 mm | 9.00 | 8.23 | 9.81 | 7.47 | 6.42 | 7.48 |
| 13 mm | 9.46 | 9.38 | 11.57 | 5.51 | 5.17 | 7.54 |
| 17 mm | 12.70 | 12.52 | 14.90 | 7.05 | 7.66 | 10.77 |
| 22 mm | 12.99 | 15.20 | 17.30 | 2.24 | 1.00 | 2.94 |
| 28 mm | 11.24 | 11.63 | 12.93 | 2.11 | 4.85 | 6.56 |
| 37 mm | 10.02 | 5.82 | 6.21 | 2.67 | 1.55 | 2.51 |