Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25342215›Full record

ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2015

Scatter correction improves concordance in SPECT MPI with a dedicated cardiac SPECT solid-state camera.

Amir Pourmoghaddas, Karen Vanderwerf, Terrence D Ruddy, R Glenn Wells

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Bias and precision of SPECT-basedEJNMMI physics · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Direct Attenuation Correction Using Deep Learning for Cardiac SPECT: A Feasibility Study.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2021
    Article
  12. Noise heterogeneity in attenuation-corrected cardiac SPECT images increases perfusion value uncertainty near the base of the heart.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Diagnostic implications of CZT SPECT and impact of CT attenuation correction.Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Optimization of a simultaneous dual-isotopeJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amir PourmoghaddasDepartment of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON, Canada, apour@ottawaheart.ca.
Karen Vanderwerf
Terrence D Ruddy
R Glenn Wells
University of Ottawa · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCorrection for photon attenuation and scatter improves image quality with conventional NaI-based gamma cameras but evaluation of these corrections for novel solid-state dedicated cardiac cameras is limited. In this study, we assess the accuracy of dual-energy-window (DEW) scatter correction (SC) applied to clinically acquired (99m)Tc-tetrofosmin myocardial perfusion images obtained on a dedicated multi-pinhole camera with cadmium-zinc-telluride (CZT) detectors (GE Discovery NM530) compared to DEW scatter-corrected images from our conventional SPECT camera (GE Infinia Hawkeye 4; INF).

methodsA modified DEW SC method was formulated to account for the detection of primary photons in the lower energy window (120 keV ± 5%) with CZT detectors, in addition to estimating the scattered photons detected in the photopeak window (140 keV ± 10%). Phantom experiments were used to estimate the DEW correction parameters. Data from 108 patients, acquired using a standard rest/stress Tc-99m-tetrofosmin SPECT/CT protocol on both cameras, were reconstructed with no correction (NC), attenuation correction (AC), and AC with DEW-SC. Images were compared based on the summed stress/rest/difference scores (SSS/SRS/SDS) calculated by clinical software.

resultsThe correlation between SSS/SRS for the two cameras was excellent (r ≥ 0.94). The mean difference between cameras was <0.4 for SSS/SRS/SDS scores. Since datasets did not follow a normal distribution, non-parametric tests were used to show significant differences between datasets. Classification of disease (SSS) was highly correlated, as ranked by the two cameras (kendall's tau = 0.72, P < .001). AC significantly reduced the mean difference between the two cameras for SSS/SRS compared to NC. AC without SC on the CZT introduced a bias towards higher scores when compared to the INF, which was reduced after applying SC. Although SC increased noise, the scores for the AC/SC images were not significantly different between the two cameras (P > .1).

conclusionsDEW-SC on the CZT camera was feasible and produced images that are not significantly different from those acquired on the INF camera. Although use of SC on CZT images does increase noise, the resultant noise does not introduce bias relative to the INF camera.

Indexed as

ArtifactsCoronary Artery DiseaseEquipment DesignEquipment Failure AnalysisHumansImage EnhancementImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMiddle AgedMyocardial Perfusion ImagingPhantoms, ImagingPhotonsReproducibility of ResultsScattering, RadiationSemiconductorsSensitivity and SpecificityTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

Identifiers

PMID25342215
OpenAlexW2026813261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.