Department of Cardiology, North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, NY 11030, USA.
J Nucl Cardiol. 2011 Feb;18(1):52-61. doi: 10.1007/s12350-010-9304-5. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
Filtered back-projection (FBP) has been a standard in SPECT imaging. Newer iterative reconstruction algorithms have been shown to improve image quality and shorten acquisition time by taking into account statistical nature of raw data and using resolution recovery (RR). Wide-beam reconstruction (WBR) is an iterative algorithm with RR and adaptive noise control. We prospectively investigated outcome of WBR half-time SPECT on diagnostic certainty, accuracy and normalcy by quantitative perfusion analysis in comparison to full-time FBP images.
434 patients underwent rest (201)Tl/stress (99m)Tc-sestamibi full-time (20 s/stop, FBP) followed by a half-time (10 s/stop, WBR) SPECT. 34 patients underwent an angiogram within 90 days of SPECT. Diagnostic certainty was based on summed stress scores (SSS, 5-point/17 segments): normal if SSS ≤ 1, equivocal if SSS = 2-3, and abnormal if SSS ≥ 4. Perfusion defects were normalized to a percent of total myocardium, and expressed as %LV = defect SSS/maximal SSS × 100% with maximal SSS of 28 for left anterior descending (LAD), and of 20 for right coronary (RCA) and left circumflex (LCX). Change in %LV (Δ%LV = %LV FBP - %LV WBR) was evaluated for diagnostically discordant versus concordant scans.
SSS and %LV demonstrated very good correlation. There were significantly fewer equivocal scans with WBR (38 vs 151 FBP, P < .0001). Most discordant scans were equivocal FBP SPECT becoming normal with WBR (123/151). Δ%LV(LAD) for discordant studies was greater for women (5.4% ± 4.2%, P < .001), while Δ%LV(RCA,LCX) (4.4% ± 5.1%, P < .001; 1.2% ± 5.0%, P = .04) were greater for men. Normalcy rate was 91.4% for FBP and WBR with more definitely normal WBR studies (84.5% vs 43.9% for FBP, P < .0001). There were no differences in sensitivity (FBP 84.2%, WBR 81.6%), specificity (FBP 54.6%, WBR 63.6%), and accuracy (FBP, WBR 77.6%).
Quantitative perfusion analysis suggests that adaptive noise control with WBR improves uniformity of myocardium comparing to FBP techniques, and results in improved diagnostic certainty while preserving normalcy and accuracy.
滤波反投影(FBP)一直是 SPECT 成像的标准。已经证明,较新的迭代重建算法通过考虑原始数据的统计特性并使用分辨率恢复(RR)可以提高图像质量并缩短采集时间。宽束重建(WBR)是一种具有 RR 和自适应噪声控制的迭代算法。我们前瞻性地研究了 WBR 半时 SPECT 通过定量灌注分析与全时 FBP 图像相比在诊断确定性、准确性和正常性方面的结果。
434 例患者接受静息(201)Tl/应激(99m)Tc- sestamibi 全时(20 秒/停,FBP)和半时(10 秒/停,WBR)SPECT。34 例患者在 SPECT 后 90 天内进行了血管造影。诊断确定性基于总和应激评分(SSS,5 分/17 节段):SSS≤1 为正常,SSS=2-3 为不确定,SSS≥4 为异常。灌注缺损归一化为总心肌的百分比,并表示为%LV=缺陷 SSS/最大 SSS×100%,其中左前降支(LAD)的最大 SSS 为 28,右冠状动脉(RCA)和左旋支(LCX)为 20。评估诊断不一致与一致扫描之间的%LV 变化(Δ%LV=%LV FBP-%LV WBR)。
SSS 和%LV 显示出很好的相关性。WBR 时的不确定扫描明显减少(38 与 151 FBP,P<.0001)。大多数不一致的扫描是不确定的 FBP SPECT 变为正常的 WBR(123/151)。不一致研究的Δ%LV(LAD)对于女性更大(5.4%±4.2%,P<.001),而男性的Δ%LV(RCA、LCX)(4.4%±5.1%,P<.001;1.2%±5.0%,P=0.04)更大。FBP 和 WBR 的正常率分别为 91.4%,WBR 的正常率更高(84.5%比 FBP 的 43.9%,P<.0001)。敏感性(FBP 84.2%,WBR 81.6%)、特异性(FBP 54.6%,WBR 63.6%)和准确性(FBP,WBR 77.6%)没有差异。
定量灌注分析表明,与 FBP 技术相比,WBR 中的自适应噪声控制可改善心肌的均匀性,并提高诊断确定性,同时保持正常性和准确性。