Cuddy-Walsh SG, deKemp RA, Ruddy TD, Wells RG. Improved precision of SPECT myocardial blood flow using a net tracer retention model.
Med Phys 2022;
50:2009-2021. [PMID:
36565461 DOI:
10.1002/mp.16186]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/20/2022] [Revised: 11/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Noninvasive quantification of absolute myocardial blood flow (MBF) and myocardial flow reserve (MFR) provides incremental benefit to relative myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) to diagnose and manage heart disease. MBF can be measured with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) but the uncertainty in the measured values is high. Standardization and optimization of protocols for SPECT MBF measurements will improve the consistency of this technique. One element of the processing protocol is the choice of kinetic model used to analyze the dynamic image series.
PURPOSE
This study evaluates if a net tracer retention model (RET) will provide a better fit to the acquired data and greater test-retest precision than a one-compartment model (1CM) for SPECT MBF, with (+MC) and without (-MC) manual motion correction.
METHODS
Data from previously acquired rest-stress MBF studies (31 SPECT-PET and 30 SPECT-SPECT) were reprocessed ± MC. Rate constants (K1) were extracted using 1CM and RET, +/-MC, and compared pairwise with standard PET MBF measurements using cross-validation to obtain calibration parameters for converting SPECT rate constants to MBF and to assess the goodness-of-fit of the calibration curves. Precision (coefficient of variation of test re-test relative differences, COV) of flow measurements was computed for 1CM and RET ± MC using data from the repeated SPECT MBF studies.
RESULTS
Both the RET model and MC improved the goodness-of-fit of the SPECT MBF calibration curves to PET. All models produced minimal bias compared with PET (mean bias < 0.6%). The SPECT-SPECT MBF COV significantly improved from 34% (1CM+MC) to 28% (RET+MC, P = 0.008).
CONCLUSION
The RET+MC model provides a better calibration of SPECT to PET and blood flow measurements with better precision than the 1CM, without loss of accuracy.
Collapse