Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin 2018; 57(04): 153-159
DOI: 10.3413/Nukmed-0953-17-12
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag

Image Quality Assessment for Low-Dose-CT in Hybrid SPECT/CT Imaging

Bildqualität-Bewertungsmethode für Niedrigdosis-Computertomographie bei der Hybridbildgebung (SPECT/CT)
Oliver S. Grosser
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Juri Ruf
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical Centre, University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
,
Dennis Kupitz
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Damian Czuczwara
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
David Loewenthal
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Markus Thormann
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Christian Furth
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
3   Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Berlin, Germany
,
Jens Ricke
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
4   Department of Clinical Radiology, Munich University Hospitals, Grosshadern, Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany
,
Maciej Pech
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Michael C. Kreissl
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
,
Holger Amthauer
1   Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany
3   Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, and Berlin Institute of Health, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Berlin, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received: 19 December 2017

accepted: 25 June 2018

Publication Date:
20 August 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Objectives: Low-dose-computed tomography (LD-CT) is used in nuclear medicine hybrid imaging (e.g., SPECT/CT) for attenuation correction of emission data and anatomical correlation of findings. However, there are currently no standards for image quality (e. g., detectability) comparable to those for diagnostic CT. Therefore, the aim of this explorative study was to evaluate retrospective LDCT data in terms of CT image quality and detectability of anatomical structures. Methods: Two readers blindly scored abdominal LD-CT images (n = 40 patients) in terms of detectability (n = 20 structures/patient), image quality, and readers’ confidence in scoring the image quality for a clinically hybrid imaging protocol. Results were analysed by ANOVA to identify factors (e. g., anatomical structures) that influenced performance scores. The inter-rater agreement was evaluated by determining the chance-corrected Cohen’s Kappa coefficient. Results: Image noise was acceptable for anatomical correlation in 96.1 % of the readings with an almost perfect inter-rater agreement (KBP = 0.85). A detectability of at least 80 % was observed in 13/20 (KBP ≥ 0.7) and 90 % in 9/20 (KBP ≥ 0.85) of the structures analysed by both readers. The confidence of both readers in scoring image quality was at least sufficient in 98.8 % of the examined patients (KBP = 0.95). Conclusion: Although LD-CT protocols commonly used in hybrid imaging have a poor image quality not suitable for primary CT diagnostics, they enable detection of a variety of anatomical structures. LDCT can therefore also be referenced in the associated reports for anatomical correlation of findings from SPECT imaging.

Keywords

SPECT/CT - Low-Dose-CT - Hybrid imaging - Detectability - Image quality
 

  • References

  • 1 Balonov MI, Shrimpton PC. Effective dose and risks from medical x-ray procedures. Ann ICRP 2012; 41: 129-141 Bolwin K, Czekalla B, Frohwein LJ. et al. Anthropomorphic thorax phantom for cardio-respiratory motion simulation in tomographic imaging. Phys Med Biol 2018; 63 (03) 035009.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Bongartz G, Golding SJ, Jurik AG. et al. European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. Dec 01, 2017 http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/htmlindex.htm.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Brennan RL, Prediger DJ. Coefficient kappa: Some uses, misuses, and alternatives. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1981; 41: 687-699.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Brix G, Nekolla EA, Borowski M. et al. Radiation risk and protection of patients in clinical SPECT/ CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 41: S125-S136.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Chen GTY, Kung JH, Beaudette KP. Artifacts in computed tomography scanning of moving objects. Semin Radiat Oncol 2004; 14: 19-26.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Dobrindt O, Amthauer H, Krueger A. et al. Hybrid SPECT/CT for the assessment of a painful hip after uncemented total hip arthroplasty. BMC Med Imaging 2015; 15: 1487.
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Even-Sapir E, Flusser G, Lerman H. et al. SPECT/ multislice low-dose CT: a clinically relevant constituent in the imaging algorithm of nononcologic patients referred for bone scintigraphy. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 319-324.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Grosser OS, Kupitz D, Ruf J. et al. Optimization of SPECT-CT Hybrid Imaging Using Iterative Image Reconstruction for Low-Dose CT: A Phantom Study. PLoS ONE 2015; 10: e0138658.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Hérin E, Gardavaud F, Chiaradia M. et al. Use of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction (MBIR) in reduced-dose CT for routine follow-up of patients with malignant lymphoma: dose savings, image quality and phantom study. Eur Radiol 2015; 25: 2362-2370.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Horger M, Eschmann SM, Pfannenberg C. et al. Evaluation of combined transmission and emission tomography for classification of skeletal lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183: 655-661.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 bICRP. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP. 2007: 37.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 bICRP. Radiation Dose to Patients from Radiopharmaceuticals – Addendum 3 to ICRP Publication 53. ICRP Publication 106. Ann ICRP. 2007: 38.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 bICRU. Medical imaging – The assessment of image quality : ICRU Report No. 54. Journal of the ICRU. 1996
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kesner AL, Schleyer PJ, Büther F. et al. On transcending the impasse of respiratory motion correction applications in routine clinical imaging – a consideration of a fully automated data driven motion control framework. EJNMMI Phys 2014; 01: 8.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Killoran JH, Gerbaudo VH, Mamede M. et al. Motion artifacts occurring at the lung/diaphragm interface using 4D CT attenuation correction of 4D PET scans. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2011; 12: 3502.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 159-174.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Larkin AM, Serulle Y, Wagner S. et al. Quantifying the Increase in Radiation Exposure Associated with SPECT/CT Compared to SPECT Alone for Routine Nuclear Medicine Examinations. International Journal of Molecular Imaging 2011; 2011: 897202.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Lerman H, Lievshitz G, Zak O. et al. Improved sentinel node identification by SPECT/CT in overweight patients with breast cancer. J Nucl Med 2007; 48: 201-206.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 2006; 26: 503-512.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA Physics Tutorial for Residents: Topics in CT. Radiation dose in CT. Radiographics 2002; 22: 1541-1553.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Nyflot MJ, Lee T-C, Alessio AM. et al. Impact of CT attenuation correction method on quantitative respiratory-correlated (4D) PET/CT imaging. Med Phys 2015; 42: 110-120.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Rausch I, Fuechsel FG, Kuderer C. et al. Radiation exposure levels of routine SPECT/CT imaging protocols. Eur J Radiol 2016; 85: 1627-1636.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Rizzo S, Kalra M, Schmidt B. et al. Comparison of angular and combined automatic tube current modulation techniques with constant tube current CT of the abdomen and pelvis. Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186: 673-679.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ruf J, Lehmkuhl L, Bertram H. et al. Impact of SPECT and integrated low-dose CT after radioiodine therapy on the management of patients with thyroid carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun 2004; 25: 1177-1182.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Schmidt D, Szikszai A, Linke R. et al. Impact of 131I SPECT/spiral CT on nodal staging of differentiated thyroid carcinoma at the first radioablation. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 18-23.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sibille L, Chambert B, Alonso S. et al. Impact of the Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique on Radiation Dose and Image Quality in Bone SPECT/CT. J Nucl Med 2016; 57: 1091-1095.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Stamm G, Nagel HD. [CT-expo-a novel program for dose evaluation in CT]. Rofo 2002; 174: 1570-1576.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 van Straten M, Deak P, Shrimpton PC. et al. The effect of angular and longitudinal tube current modulations on the estimation of organ and effective doses in x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 2009; 36: 4881-4889.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Volders D, Bols A, Haspeslagh M. et al. Modelbased iterative reconstruction and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT: comparison of image quality in the detection of colorectal liver metastases. Radiology 2013; 269: 469-474.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Xia T, Alessio AM, De Man B. et al. Ultra-low dose CT attenuation correction for PET/CT. Phys Med Biol 2012; 57: 309-328.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Yang CC, Yang BH, Tu CY. et al. Low-dose computed tomography scans with automatic exposure control for patients of different ages undergoing cardiac PET/CT and SPECT/CT. Nucl Med Commun 2017; 38: 546-555.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Zaidi H, Hasegawa B. Determination of the attenuation map in emission tomography. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 291-315.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar