Literature DB >> 34328565

Optimization of SPECT/CT imaging protocols for quantitative and qualitative 99mTc SPECT.

Dennis Kupitz1, Heiko Wissel2, Jan Wuestemann2, Stephanie Bluemel3, Maciej Pech2,4, Holger Amthauer3, Michael C Kreissl2,4, Oliver S Grosser2,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The introduction of hybrid SPECT/CT devices enables quantitative imaging in SPECT, providing a methodological setup for quantitation using SPECT tracers comparable to PET/CT. We evaluated a specific quantitative reconstruction algorithm for SPECT data using a 99mTc-filled NEMA phantom. Quantitative and qualitative image parameters were evaluated for different parametrizations of the acquisition and reconstruction protocol to identify an optimized quantitative protocol.
RESULTS: The reconstructed activity concentration (ACrec) and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of all examined protocols (n = 16) were significantly affected by the parametrization of the weighting factor k used in scatter correction, the total number of iterations and the sphere volume (all, p < 0.0001). The two examined SPECT acquisition protocols (with 60 or 120 projections) had a minor impact on the ACrec and no significant impact on the SNR. In comparison to the known AC, the use of default scatter correction (k = 0.47) or object-specific scatter correction (k = 0.18) resulted in an underestimation of ACrec in the largest sphere volume (26.5 ml) by - 13.9 kBq/ml (- 16.3%) and - 7.1 kBq/ml (- 8.4%), respectively. An increase in total iterations leads to an increase in estimated AC and a decrease in SNR. The mean difference between ACrec and known AC decreased with an increasing number of total iterations (e.g., for 20 iterations (2 iterations/10 subsets) = - 14.6 kBq/ml (- 17.1%), 240 iterations (24i/10s) = - 8.0 kBq/ml (- 9.4%), p < 0.0001). In parallel, the mean SNR decreased significantly from 2i/10s to 24i/10s by 76% (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Quantitative SPECT imaging is feasible with the used reconstruction algorithm and hybrid SPECT/CT, and its consistent implementation in diagnostics may provide perspectives for quantification in routine clinical practice (e.g., assessment of bone metabolism). When combining quantitative analysis and diagnostic imaging, we recommend using two different reconstruction protocols with task-specific optimized setups (quantitative vs. qualitative reconstruction). Furthermore, individual scatter correction significantly improves both quantitative and qualitative results.
© 2021. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Image reconstruction; Optimization; Quantitative SPECT; SPECT/CT; Scatter correction

Year:  2021        PMID: 34328565     DOI: 10.1186/s40658-021-00405-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  EJNMMI Phys        ISSN: 2197-7364


  23 in total

Review 1.  Determination of the attenuation map in emission tomography.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Bruce Hasegawa
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  A practical method for position-dependent Compton-scatter correction in single photon emission CT.

Authors:  K Ogawa; Y Harata; T Ichihara; A Kubo; S Hashimoto
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 10.048

3.  SPECT dual-energy-window Compton correction: scatter multiplier required for quantification.

Authors:  K F Koral; F M Swailem; S Buchbinder; N H Clinthorne; W L Rogers; B M Tsui
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Quantitative SPECT reconstruction using CT-derived corrections.

Authors:  Kathy Willowson; Dale L Bailey; Clive Baldock
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 5.  An evidence-based review of quantitative SPECT imaging and potential clinical applications.

Authors:  Dale L Bailey; Kathy P Willowson
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 10.057

6.  Quantitative accuracy of clinical 99mTc SPECT/CT using ordered-subset expectation maximization with 3-dimensional resolution recovery, attenuation, and scatter correction.

Authors:  Johannes Zeintl; Alexander Hans Vija; Amos Yahil; Joachim Hornegger; Torsten Kuwert
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 7.  Quantitative SPECT imaging: a review and recommendations by the Focus Committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine Computer and Instrumentation Council.

Authors:  M S Rosenthal; J Cullom; W Hawkins; S C Moore; B M Tsui; M Yester
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Improved SPECT quantification using compensation for scattered photons.

Authors:  R J Jaszczak; K L Greer; C E Floyd; C C Harris; R E Coleman
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Experimental determination of the weighting factor for the energy window subtraction-based downscatter correction for I-123 in brain SPECT studies.

Authors:  Robin de Nijs; Søren Holm; Gerda Thomsen; Morten Ziebell; Claus Svarer
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2010-10

10.  Improving quantitative dosimetry in (177)Lu-DOTATATE SPECT by energy window-based scatter corrections.

Authors:  Robin de Nijs; Vera Lagerburg; Thomas L Klausen; Søren Holm
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 1.690

View more
  2 in total

1.  Experimental evaluation of absolute quantification in 99m Tc-TRODAT-1 SPECT/CT brain dopamine transporter (DAT) studies.

Authors:  Norasma Amira Zainudin; Nadiah Zulkifli; Khadijah Hamid; Hazlin Hashim; Syahir Mansor
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 2.243

2.  Verification of the effect of acquisition time for SwiftScan on quantitative bone single-photon emission computed tomography using an anthropomorphic phantom.

Authors:  Takuro Shiiba; Yuya Sekikawa; Shinji Tateoka; Nobutaka Shinohara; Yuuki Inoue; Yasuyoshi Kuroiwa; Takashi Tanaka; Yasushi Kihara; Takuroh Imamura
Journal:  EJNMMI Phys       Date:  2022-07-30
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.