M Ohkubo1, I Odano, M Takahashi. 1. Department of Radiological Technology, College of Biomedical Technology, Niigata University, Japan.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of simple methods of quantifying regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) with 123I-labeled N-isopropyl-p-iodoamphetamine (IMP) and SPECT and to determine which method was best. METHODS: Four methods were examined: (a) the microsphere method with continuous withdrawal of arterial blood, which was based on a microsphere model using the SPECT image obtained 5 min after tracer injection, (b) the microsphere method with one-point sampling, which was the same as the first method except that one-point sampling was used instead of continuous withdrawal, (c) the modified microsphere method with one-point sampling, which was the same as the second method except that a later SPECT image (30-min postinjection) with correction was used and (d) a table look-up method based on a two-compartment model with one-point arterial blood sampling and two SPECT scans obtained 40- and 180-min postinjection. The accuracy of these methods was validated by comparing the rCBF values with those obtained by nonlinear least squares fitting analysis based on the two-compartment model in 15 subjects. RESULTS: Regional cerebral blood flow values obtained by the first method correlated most closely with those obtained by nonlinear least squares fitting analysis (error, 6.8%). The second method estimated rCBF with a mean error of 10.4%. The third method estimated rCBF with a mean error of 13.1%, even though it tended to slightly overestimate rCBF. The fourth method was inclined to underestimate rCBF with a mean error of 17.1%, and it greatly overestimated regional distribution volume. CONCLUSION: The first method was the most accurate and reliable. For less invasiveness, the first method should be combined with one-point sampling instead of continuous withdrawal, which was used in the second method. When using a delayed SPECT image with a conventional SPECT scanner, the third method was considered to be superior to the fourth method.
UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy and reliability of simple methods of quantifying regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) with 123I-labeled N-isopropyl-p-iodoamphetamine (IMP) and SPECT and to determine which method was best. METHODS: Four methods were examined: (a) the microsphere method with continuous withdrawal of arterial blood, which was based on a microsphere model using the SPECT image obtained 5 min after tracer injection, (b) the microsphere method with one-point sampling, which was the same as the first method except that one-point sampling was used instead of continuous withdrawal, (c) the modified microsphere method with one-point sampling, which was the same as the second method except that a later SPECT image (30-min postinjection) with correction was used and (d) a table look-up method based on a two-compartment model with one-point arterial blood sampling and two SPECT scans obtained 40- and 180-min postinjection. The accuracy of these methods was validated by comparing the rCBF values with those obtained by nonlinear least squares fitting analysis based on the two-compartment model in 15 subjects. RESULTS: Regional cerebral blood flow values obtained by the first method correlated most closely with those obtained by nonlinear least squares fitting analysis (error, 6.8%). The second method estimated rCBF with a mean error of 10.4%. The third method estimated rCBF with a mean error of 13.1%, even though it tended to slightly overestimate rCBF. The fourth method was inclined to underestimate rCBF with a mean error of 17.1%, and it greatly overestimated regional distribution volume. CONCLUSION: The first method was the most accurate and reliable. For less invasiveness, the first method should be combined with one-point sampling instead of continuous withdrawal, which was used in the second method. When using a delayed SPECT image with a conventional SPECT scanner, the third method was considered to be superior to the fourth method.