The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (핵의학기술)

The Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine Technology (대한핵의학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Tracking of Count-Based Volumetric Changes in Nuclear Medicine Imaging

핵의학 영상에서 계수기반 체적변화 추적에 관한 고찰

  • Ji-Hyeon Kim (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Seoul Medical Center) ;
  • Jooyoung Lee (Department of Radiological Technology, Shingu College) ;
  • Hoon-Hee Park (Department of Radiological Technology, Shingu College)
  • 김지현 (서울특별시 서울의료원 핵의학과) ;
  • 이주영 (신구대학교 방사선학과) ;
  • 박훈희 (신구대학교 방사선학과)
  • Received : 2024.03.20
  • Accepted : 2024.04.23
  • Published : 2024.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: Quantitative analysis through count measurement in nuclear medicine planar images is limited by analysis techniques that are useful for obtaining various clinical information or by organ overlap or artifacts in actual clinical practice. On the other hand, the use of SPECT tomography images is quantitative analysis using volume rather than planar, which is not only free from problems such as projection overlap, but also has excellent quantitative accuracy. In the use of developing SPECT quantitative analysis technology, this study aims to compare the accuracy of quantitative analysis between ROI of the conventional planar images and VOI of the SPECT tomographic images in evaluating the count change happened by the volume change of the source. Materials and Methods: A 99mTcO4- source(200.17 MBq) was filled with sterilized water in the syringe to create a phantom with an inner diameter volume of 60 cc, and a planar image and a SPECT image were obtained by reducing the volume by 15 cc (25%) respectively. ROI and VOI(threshold: 1~45%, 5% interval) were set for each image obtained to estimate true count and measure the total count, and compared with the preseted volumetric change rate(%). Results: When volume changes of 25%, 50%, and 75% occurred in the initial volume of 60 cc(100%) of the phantom, the average count changes of the measured planar image were 26.8%, 53.2%, 77.5%, and the average count changes of the SPECT image were 24.4%, 50.9%, and 76.8%. In this case, the VOI size(cm3) set showed an average change rate of 25.4%, 51.1%, and 76.6%. The highest threshold value for the accuracy of radioactive concentration by VOI size (average error -1.03%) was 35%, and the VOI size of the same threshold had an error of -17.1% on average compared to the actual volume. Conclusion: On average, the count-based volumetric change rate in nuclear medicine images was able to track changes more accurately using VOI than ROI, but there was no significant difference with relatively similar value. However, the accuracy of radioactive concentration according to individual VOI sizes did not match, but it is considered that a relatively accurate quantitative analysis can be expected when the size of VOI is set smaller than the actual volume.

Keywords

References

  1. Klingensmith III WC, Lawrence SP. The Gastric Emptying Study: Protocol Design Considerations. J Nucl Med Technol 2008;36:195-9  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.108.054817
  2. Kwak DW, Kim JH, Kim KH, Lee KJ, Park YJ, Lee IW. The Gastric-Bile Juice Reflux in Patients from Hepatobiliary Scan with Subtotal Gastrectomy. Korean J Nucl Med Technol. 2010;14(2):17-20. 
  3. Ham JC, Oh SH, Choi YH, Kang CK, Kim JS. Evaluation of Usefulness of SPECT-CT at the Examination of Digestive System Leakage Patients. Korean J Nucl Med Technol. 2018;22(1):98-102. 
  4. Zeintl J, Vija AH, Yahil A, Hornegger J, Kuwert T. Quantitative Accuracy of Clinical 99mTc SPECT/CT Using Ordered-Subset Expectation Maximization with 3-Dimensional Resolution Recovery, Attenuation, and Scatter Correction. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:921-8.  https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.109.071571
  5. Shcherbinin S, Celler A, Belhocine T, Van der werf R, Driedger A. Accuracy of quantitative reconstructions in SPECT/CT imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:4595-4604.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/17/009
  6. Said MA, Masud MA, Abdul Razak HR. Quantitative imaging with commercial SPECT. J. Phys.:Conf. Ser. 2020;1497:012025. 
  7. Peters SMB, Van der werf NR, Segbers M, Van velden FHP, Wierts R, Blokland K(J.)AK, et al. Towards standardization of absolute SPECT/CT quantification: a multi-center and multivendor phantom study. EJNMMI Physics. 2019;6:29. 
  8. Finucane CM, Murray I, Sosabowski JK, Foster JM, Mather SJ. Quantitative Accuracy of Low-Count SPECT Imaging in Phantom and In Vivo Mouse Studies. International Journal of Molecular Imaging. 2011;197381:8. 
  9. Kupitz D, Wissel H, Wuestemann J, Bluemel S, Pech M, Amthauer H, et al. Optimization of SPECT/CT imaging protocols for quantitative and qualitative 99mTc SPECT. EJNMMI Physics. 2021;8:57. 
  10. Hwang AB, Franc BL, Gullberg GT, Hasegawa BH. Assessment of the sources of error affecting the quantitative accuracy of SPECT imaging in small animals. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(9):2233-52. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/9/002