Valentin Picone1, Nikolaos Makris1, Fanny Boutevin1, Sarah Roy1, Margot Playe2, Michael Soussan3,4. 1. GE Healthcare, 78530, 283 Rue de la Miniere, Buc, France. 2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Avicenne Hospital, HUPSSD, APHP, Paris, France. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Avicenne Hospital, HUPSSD, APHP, Paris, France. Michael.soussan@aphp.fr. 4. Inserm, Institut Curie, Laboratoire d'Imagerie Translationnelle en Oncologie, Orsay, France. Michael.soussan@aphp.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The SwiftScan solution (General Electric Healthcare) combines a new low-energy high-resolution sensitivity collimator and a tomographic step-and-shoot continuous (SSC) mode acquisition. The purpose of this study is to determine whether SSC mode can be used in clinical practice with shorter examination times, while preserving image quality and ensuring accurate semi-quantification. Twenty bone scan and 10 lung scan studies were randomly selected over a period of 2 months. Three sets of image datasets were produced: step-and-shoot (SS) acquisition, simulated 25% count reduction using the Poisson resampling method (SimSS), and SimSS continuous acquisition (SimSSC), where SimSS was summed with counts acquired during detector head rotation. Visual assessment (5-point Likert scale, 2 readers) and semi-quantitative evaluation (50 focal uptake from 10 bone studies), assessed by SUVmean, coefficient of variation (COV), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were performed using t test and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Intra-reader agreement was substantial for reader 1 (k = 0.71) and for reader 2 (k = 0.61). Inter-reader agreement was substantial for SS set (k = 0.93) and moderate for SimSSC (k = 0.52). Bland-Altman analysis showed a good interchangeability of SS and SimSSC SUV values. The mean CNR between SS and SimSSC was not significantly different: 42.9 ± 43.7 [23.7-62.1] vs. 43.1 ± 46 [22.9-63.3] (p = 0.46), respectively. COV values, assessing noise level, did not deviate significantly between SS and SimSSC: 0.20 ± 0.08 [0.18-0.23] vs. 0.21 ± 0.08, [0.18-0.23] (p = 0.15), respectively, whereas a significant difference was demonstrated between SS and SimSS: 0.20 ± 0.08 [0.18-0.23] vs. 0.23 ± 0.09 [0.20-0.25] (p < 0.0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SSC mode acquisition decreases examination time by approximately 25% in bone and lung SPECT/CT studies compared to SS mode (~ 2 min per single-bed SPECT), without compromising image quality and signal quantification. This SPECT sensitivity improvement also offers the prospect of more comfortable exams, with less motion artifacts, especially in painful or dyspneic patients.
BACKGROUND: The SwiftScan solution (General Electric Healthcare) combines a new low-energy high-resolution sensitivity collimator and a tomographic step-and-shoot continuous (SSC) mode acquisition. The purpose of this study is to determine whether SSC mode can be used in clinical practice with shorter examination times, while preserving image quality and ensuring accurate semi-quantification. Twenty bone scan and 10 lung scan studies were randomly selected over a period of 2 months. Three sets of image datasets were produced: step-and-shoot (SS) acquisition, simulated 25% count reduction using the Poisson resampling method (SimSS), and SimSS continuous acquisition (SimSSC), where SimSS was summed with counts acquired during detector head rotation. Visual assessment (5-point Likert scale, 2 readers) and semi-quantitative evaluation (50 focal uptake from 10 bone studies), assessed by SUVmean, coefficient of variation (COV), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), were performed using t test and Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: Intra-reader agreement was substantial for reader 1 (k = 0.71) and for reader 2 (k = 0.61). Inter-reader agreement was substantial for SS set (k = 0.93) and moderate for SimSSC (k = 0.52). Bland-Altman analysis showed a good interchangeability of SS and SimSSC SUV values. The mean CNR between SS and SimSSC was not significantly different: 42.9 ± 43.7 [23.7-62.1] vs. 43.1 ± 46 [22.9-63.3] (p = 0.46), respectively. COV values, assessing noise level, did not deviate significantly between SS and SimSSC: 0.20 ± 0.08 [0.18-0.23] vs. 0.21 ± 0.08, [0.18-0.23] (p = 0.15), respectively, whereas a significant difference was demonstrated between SS and SimSS: 0.20 ± 0.08 [0.18-0.23] vs. 0.23 ± 0.09 [0.20-0.25] (p < 0.0001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SSC mode acquisition decreases examination time by approximately 25% in bone and lung SPECT/CT studies compared to SS mode (~ 2 min per single-bed SPECT), without compromising image quality and signal quantification. This SPECT sensitivity improvement also offers the prospect of more comfortable exams, with less motion artifacts, especially in painful or dyspneic patients.