Desy Alessandro, Bouvet Guillaume F, Lafrenière Nancy, Zamanian Atefeh, Després Philippe, Beauregard Jean-Mathieu
Department of Medical Imaging, and Research Centre (Oncology Axis), CHU de Québec - Université Laval, 11 Côte du Palais, QC, G1R 2J6, Quebec City, Canada.
Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, and Cancer Research Centre, Université Laval, Quebec City, Canada.
EJNMMI Phys. 2022 Aug 17;9(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s40658-022-00484-w.
Dead-time correction is required for accurate quantitative SPECT-based dosimetry in the context of personalised Lu radiopharmaceutical therapy. We aimed to evaluate the impact of applying dead-time correction on the reconstructed SPECT image versus on the acquisition projections before reconstruction.
Data from 16 SPECT/CT acquisitions of a decaying Lu-filled phantom (up to 20.75 GBq) and dual-timepoint SPECT/CT in 14 patients treated with personalised Lu peptide receptor radionuclide therapy were analysed. Dead time was determined based on the acquisition wide-spectrum count rate for each projection and averaged for the entire acquisition. Three dead-time correction methods (DTCMs) were used: the per-projection correction, where each projection was individually corrected before reconstruction (DTCM1, the standard of reference), and two per-volume methods using the average dead-time correction factor of the acquisition applied to all projections before reconstruction (DTCM2) or to the SPECT image after reconstruction (DTCM3). Relative differences in quantification were assessed for various volumes of interest (VOIs) on the phantom and patient SPECT images. In patients, the resulting dosimetry estimates for tissues of interest were also compared between DTCMs.
Both per-volume DTCMs (DTCM2 and DTCM3) were found to be equivalent, with VOI count differences not exceeding 0.8%. When comparing the per-volume post-reconstruction DTCM3 versus the per-projection pre-reconstruction DTCM1, differences in VOI counts and absorbed dose estimates did not exceed 2%, with very few exceptions. The largest absorbed dose deviation was observed for a kidney at 3.5%.
While per-projection dead-time correction appears ideal for QSPECT, post-reconstruction correction is an acceptable alternative that is more practical to implement in the clinics, and that results in minimal deviations in quantitative accuracy and dosimetry estimates, as compared to the per-projection correction.
在个性化镥放射性药物治疗中,为了基于单光子发射计算机断层扫描(SPECT)进行准确的定量剂量测定,需要进行死时间校正。我们旨在评估应用死时间校正对重建后的SPECT图像与重建前的采集投影的影响。
分析了来自16次对充满镥的衰减体模(高达20.75GBq)的SPECT/CT采集数据,以及14例接受个性化镥肽受体放射性核素治疗患者的双时间点SPECT/CT数据。根据每个投影的采集广谱计数率确定死时间,并对整个采集进行平均。使用了三种死时间校正方法(DTCM):逐投影校正,即每个投影在重建前单独校正(DTCM1,参考标准),以及两种体校正方法,一种是将采集的平均死时间校正因子应用于重建前的所有投影(DTCM2),另一种是应用于重建后的SPECT图像(DTCM3)。在体模和患者SPECT图像上,对不同感兴趣体积(VOI)的定量相对差异进行了评估。在患者中,还比较了不同DTCM对感兴趣组织的剂量测定估计结果。
发现两种体DTCM(DTCM2和DTCM3)是等效的,VOI计数差异不超过0.8%。将重建后的体DTCM3与重建前的逐投影DTCM1进行比较时,VOI计数和吸收剂量估计的差异不超过2%,只有极少数例外。观察到肾脏的最大吸收剂量偏差为3.5%。
虽然逐投影死时间校正似乎是定量SPECT的理想方法,但重建后校正也是一种可接受的替代方法,在临床上实施更实际,并且与逐投影校正相比,在定量准确性和剂量测定估计方面产生的偏差最小。