Advertisement

Development of a practical image-based scatter correction method for brain perfusion SPECT: comparison with the TEW method

  • Miho Shidahara
  • Hiroshi Watabe
  • Kyeong Min Kim
  • Takashi Kato
  • Shoji Kawatsu
  • Rikio Kato
  • Kumiko Yoshimura
  • Hidehiro Iida
  • Kengo Ito
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

An image-based scatter correction (IBSC) method was developed to convert scatter-uncorrected into scatter-corrected SPECT images. The purpose of this study was to validate this method by means of phantom simulations and human studies with 99mTc-labeled tracers, based on comparison with the conventional triple energy window (TEW) method.

Methods

The IBSC method corrects scatter on the reconstructed image \(I_{{AC}} ^{{\mu b}} \) with Chang’s attenuation correction factor. The scatter component image is estimated by convolving \(I_{{AC}} ^{{\mu b}} \) with a scatter function followed by multiplication with an image-based scatter fraction function. The IBSC method was evaluated with Monte Carlo simulations and 99mTc-ethyl cysteinate dimer SPECT human brain perfusion studies obtained from five volunteers. The image counts and contrast of the scatter-corrected images obtained by the IBSC and TEW methods were compared.

Results

Using data obtained from the simulations, the image counts and contrast of the scatter-corrected images obtained by the IBSC and TEW methods were found to be nearly identical for both gray and white matter. In human brain images, no significant differences in image contrast were observed between the IBSC and TEW methods.

Conclusion

The IBSC method is a simple scatter correction technique feasible for use in clinical routine.

Keywords

Scatter correction Single-photon emission tomography Image conversion Attenuation correction Cerebral perfusion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Science Research of The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, research grant 1420061.

References

  1. 1.
    Jaszczak RJ, Greer KL, Floyd CE Jr, Harris CC, Coleman RE. Improved SPECT quantification using compensation for scattered photons. J Nucl Med 1984;25(8):893–900PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koral KF, Wang XQ, Rogers WL, Clinthorne NH, Wang XH. SPECT compton-scattering correction by analysis of energy spectra. J Nucl Med 1988;29(2):195–202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gagnon D, Todd-Pokropek A, Arsenault A, Dupras G. Introduction to holospectral imaging in nuclear medicine for scatter subtraction. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1989;8(3):245–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    King MA, Hademenos GJ, Glick SJ. A dual-photo peak window method for scatter correction. J Nucl Med 1992;33(4):605–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ogawa K, Harata Y, Ichihara T, Kubo A, Hashimoto S. A practical method for position-dependent scatter correction method in SPECT. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1991;10(3):408–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Axelsson B, Msaki P, Israelsson A. Subtraction of compton-scattered photons in single-photon emission computerized tomography. J Nucl Med 1984;25(4):490–4PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ljungberg M, Strand SE. Scatter and attenuation correction in SPECT using density maps and Monte Carlo simulated scatter functions. J Nucl Med 1990;31(9):1560–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Msaki P, Axelsson B, Larsson SA. Some physical factors influencing the accuracy of convolution scatter correction in SPECT. Phys Med Biol 1988;34:283–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Meikle SR, Hutton BF, Bailey DL. A transmission dependent method for scatter correction in SPECT. J Nucl Med 1994;35(2):360–7PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buvat I, Rodriguez-Villafuerte M, Todd-Pokropek A, Benali H, Di Paola R. Comparative assessment of nine scatter correction methods based on spectral analysis using Monte Carlo simulations. J Nucl Med 1995;36(8):1476–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Beekman FJ, Kamphuis C, Frey EC. Scatter compensation methods in 3D iterative SPECT reconstruction: a simulation study. Phys Med Biol 1997;42:1619–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kadrmas DJ, Frey EC, Tsui BMW. Application of reconstruction-based scatter compensation to thallium-201 SPECT: implementations for reduced reconstruction image noise. IEEE Trans Med Imag 1998;17:325–33Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosenthal MS, Cullom J, Hawkins W, Moore SC, Tsui BMW, Yester M. Quantitative SPECT imaging: a review and recommendations by the Focus Committee of the Society of Nuclear Medicine Computer and Instrumentation Council. J Nucl Med 1995;36(8):1489–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kado H, Iida H, Kimura H, Ogawa T, Narita Y, Hatazawa J, et al. Brain perfusion SPECT study with 99mTc-bicisate: clinical pitfalls and improved diagnostic accuracy with a combination of linearization and scatter-attenuation correction. Ann Nucl Med 2001;15(2):123–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stodilka RZ, Kemp BJ, Msaki P, Prato FS, Nicholson R. The relative contributions of scatter and attenuation corrections toward improved brain SPECT quantification. Phys Med Biol 1998;43(19):2991–3008PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iida H, Narita Y, Kado H, Kashikura A, Sugawara S, Shoji Y, et al. Effects of scatter and attenuation correction on quantitative assessment of regional cerebral blood flow with SPECT. J Nucl Med 1998;39(1):181–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shidahara M, Watabe H, Kim KM, Hachiya T, Sayama I, Kanno I, et al. Impact of attenuation and scatter correction on SPECT for quantification of cerebral blood flow using 99mTc ethyl cysteinate dimmer. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2002;49:5–10Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Narita Y, Eberl S, Iida S, Hutton B, Braun M, Nakamura T, et al. Monte Carlo and experimental evaluation of accuracy and noise properties of two scatter correction methods for SPECT. Phys Med Biol 1996;41:2481–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chang LT. A method for attenuation correction in radio nuclide computed tomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1978;25:638–42Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nelson WR, Hirayama H, Rogers D. The EGS4 code system. Stanford Linear Accelerator Ctr. Rep. SLAC-256. Stanford, CA; 1985Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harris CC, Greer KL, Jaszczak RJ, Floyd CE, Fearnow C, Coleman RE. Technetium-99m attenuation coefficients in water-filled phantoms determined with gamma cameras. Med Phys 1984;11:681–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hoffman EJ, Cutler PD, Guerrero TM, Digby WM, Mazziotta JC. Assessment of accuracy of PET utilizing a 3-D brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 1991;11(2):A17–25PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    White DR, Widdowson E, Woodard H, Dickerson J. The composition of body tissues (II) fetus to young adult. Br J Radiol 1991;64:149–59PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mukai T, Links JM, Douglass KH, Wagner HN Jr. Scatter correction in SPECT using non-uniform attenuation data. Phys Med Biol 1988;33(10):1129–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kim KM, Watabe H, Shidahara M, Ishida M, Iida H. SPECT collimator dependency of scatter and validation of transmission-dependent scatter compensation methodologies. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2001;48:689–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van Laere K, Koole M, Versijpt J, Vandenberghe S, Brans B, D’Asseler Y, et al. Transfer of normal 99mTc-ECD brain SPET database between difference gamma cameras, Eur J Nucl Med 2001;28(4):435–49PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miho Shidahara
    • 1
  • Hiroshi Watabe
    • 2
  • Kyeong Min Kim
    • 2
  • Takashi Kato
    • 1
  • Shoji Kawatsu
    • 1
  • Rikio Kato
    • 3
  • Kumiko Yoshimura
    • 1
  • Hidehiro Iida
    • 2
  • Kengo Ito
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Brain Science and Molecular ImagingNational Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology Research InstituteObu, AichiJapan
  2. 2.Department of Investigative RadiologyNational Cardiovascular Center Research InstituteSuitaJapan
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyNational Center for Geriatrics and GerontologyObuJapan

Personalised recommendations