Advertisement

A learning-based automatic segmentation and quantification method on left ventricle in gated myocardial perfusion SPECT imaging: A feasibility study

  • Tonghe Wang
  • Yang Lei
  • Haipeng Tang
  • Zhuo He
  • Richard Castillo
  • Cheng Wang
  • Dianfu Li
  • Kristin Higgins
  • Tian Liu
  • Walter J. Curran
  • Weihua ZhouEmail author
  • Xiaofeng YangEmail author
Original Article
  • 32 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The performance of left ventricular (LV) functional assessment using gated myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPS) relies on the accuracy of segmentation. Current methods require manual adjustments that are tedious and subjective. We propose a novel machine-learning-based method to automatically segment LV myocardium and measure its volume in gated MPS imaging without human intervention.

Methods

We used an end-to-end fully convolutional neural network to segment LV myocardium by delineating its endocardial and epicardial surface. A novel compound loss function, which encourages similarity and penalizes discrepancy between prediction and training dataset, is utilized in training stage to achieve excellent performance. We retrospectively investigated 32 normal patients and 24 abnormal patients, whose LV myocardial contours automatically segmented by our method were compared with those delineated by physicians as the ground truth.

Results

The results of our method demonstrated very good agreement with the ground truth. The average DSC metrics and Hausdorff distance of the contours delineated by our method are larger than 0.900 and less than 1 cm, respectively, among all 32 + 24 patients of all phases. The correlation coefficient of the LV myocardium volume between ground truth and our results is 0.910 ± 0.061 (P < 0.001), and the mean relative error of LV myocardium volume is − 1.09 ± 3.66%.

Conclusion

These results strongly indicate the feasibility of our method in accurately quantifying LV myocardium volume change over the cardiac cycle. The learning-based segmentation method in gated MPS imaging has great promise for clinical use.

Keywords

Myocardial perfusion SPECT segmentation machine learning 

Abbreviations

SPECT

Single-photon emission computed tomography

MPS

Myocardial perfusion SPECT

LV

Left ventricular

CT

Computed tomography

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

BCE

Binary cross entropy

DSC

Dice similarity coefficient

EF

Ejection fraction

EDV

End-diastolic volume

ESV

End-systolic volume

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research is supported in part by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01CA215718 and Emory Winship Cancer Institute pilot Grant. This research is also supported by the American Heart Association under Award Number 17AIREA33700016.

Disclosures

Dr. Kristin Higgins is consulting for Astra Zeneca, Varian, on advisory board for Genentech, and receiving research funding from RefleXion Medical. Tonghe Wang, Yang Lei, Haipeng Tang, Zhuo He, Richard Castillo, Cheng Wang, Dianfu Li, Tian Liu, Walter J. Curran, Weihua Zhou, and Xiaofeng Yang declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

12350_2019_1594_MOESM1_ESM.pptx (1.8 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 1888 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Dvorak RA, Brown RKJ, Corbett JR. Interpretation of SPECT/CT myocardial perfusion images: common artifacts and quality control techniques. RadioGraphics. 2011;31:2041–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holder L, Lewis S, Abrames E, Wolin EA. Review of SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging. J Am Osteopath Coll Radiol. 2016;5:5–13.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhou W, Garcia EV. Nuclear image-guided approaches for cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016;18:7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garcia EV, Cooke CD, Van Train KF, Folks R, Peifer J, DePuey EG, et al. Technical aspects of myocardial SPECT imaging with technetium-99m sestamibi. Am J Cardiol. 1990;66:23e–31e.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Collom SJ, Case JA, Bateman TM. Electrocardiographically gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: technical principles and quality control considerations. J Nucl Cardiol. 1998;5:418–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Paul AK, Nabi HA. Gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: basic principles, technical aspects, and clinical applications. J Nucl Med Technol. 2004;32:179–87 quiz 88-9.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shah PK, Pichler M, Berman DS, Singh BN, Swan HJ. Left ventricular ejection fraction determined by radionuclide ventriculography in early stages of first transmural myocardial infarction. Relation to short-term prognosis. Am J Cardiol. 1980;45:542–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Slomka P, Xu Y, Berman D, Germano G. Quantitative analysis of perfusion studies: strengths and pitfalls. J Nucl Cardiol. 2012;19:338–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharir T, Germano G, Kang X, Lewin HC, Miranda R, Cohen I, et al. Prediction of myocardial infarction versus cardiac death by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: risk stratification by the amount of stress-induced ischemia and the poststress ejection fraction. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:831–7.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sharir T, Berman DS, Waechter PB, Areeda J, Kavanagh PB, Gerlach J, et al. Quantitative analysis of regional motion and thickening by gated myocardial perfusion SPECT: normal heterogeneity and criteria for abnormality. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1630–8.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shaw LJ, Iskandrian AE. Prognostic value of gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2004;11:171–85.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Friehling M, Chen J, Saba S, Bazaz R, Schwartzman D, Adelstein EC, et al. A prospective pilot study to evaluate the relationship between acute change in left ventricular synchrony after cardiac resynchronization therapy and patient outcome using a single-injection gated SPECT protocol. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2011;4:532–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Faber TL, Cooke CD, Folks RD, Vansant JP, Nichols KJ, DePuey EG, et al. Left ventricular function and perfusion from gated SPECT perfusion images: an integrated method. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:650–9.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xu Y, Kavanagh P, Fish M, Gerlach J, Ramesh A, Lemley M, et al. Automated quality control for segmentation of myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1418–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Waechter P, Areeda J, Van Kriekinge S, Sharir T, et al. A new algorithm for the quantitation of myocardial perfusion SPECT. I: technical principles and reproducibility. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:712–9.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Germano G, Kiat H, Kavanagh PB, Moriel M, Mazzanti M, Su HT, et al. Automatic quantification of ejection fraction from gated myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:2138–47.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eva P, Marcus C, John P, Olle P, Håkan A. Evaluation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by automated gated myocardial SPECT versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2005;25:135–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Soneson H, Ubachs JF, Ugander M, Arheden H, Heiberg E. An improved method for automatic segmentation of the left ventricle in myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bernard O, Lalande A, Zotti C, Cervenansky F, Yang X, Heng P, et al. Deep learning techniques for automatic MRI cardiac multi-structures segmentation and diagnosis: is the problem solved? IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2018;37:2514–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ngo TA, Lu Z, Carneiro G. Combining deep learning and level set for the automated segmentation of the left ventricle of the heart from cardiac cine magnetic resonance. Med Image Anal. 2017;35:159–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Betancur J, Rubeaux M, Fuchs TA, Otaki Y, Arnson Y, Slipczuk L, et al. Automatic Valve Plane Localization in Myocardial Perfusion SPECT/CT by Machine Learning: Anatomic and Clinical Validation. J Nucl Med. 2017;58:961–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Milletari F, Navab N, Ahmadi S. V-Net: Fully Convolutional Neural Networks for Volumetric Medical Image Segmentation. 2016 Fourth International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV); 2016. p. 565-71.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Varadhan R, Karangelis G, Krishnan K, Hui S. A framework for deformable image registration validation in radiotherapy clinical applications. J Appl Clin. 2013;14:4066.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Koren MJ, Devereux RB, Casale PN, Savage DD, Laragh JH. Relation of left ventricular mass and geometry to morbidity and mortality in uncomplicated essential hypertension. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114:345–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP. Left ventricular mass and incidence of coronary heart disease in an elderly cohort. The Framingham Heart Study. Ann intern med. 1989;110:101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Trobaugh GB, Wackers FJ, Sokole EB, DeRouen TA, Ritchie JL, Hamilton GW. Thallium-201 myocardial imaging: an interinstitutional study of observer variability. J Nucl Med. 1978;19:359–63.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nakajima K, Higuchi T, Taki J, Kawano M, Tonami N. Accuracy of ventricular volume and ejection fraction measured by gated myocardial SPECT: comparison of 4 software programs. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1571–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© American Society of Nuclear Cardiology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tonghe Wang
    • 1
  • Yang Lei
    • 1
  • Haipeng Tang
    • 2
  • Zhuo He
    • 2
  • Richard Castillo
    • 1
  • Cheng Wang
    • 3
  • Dianfu Li
    • 3
  • Kristin Higgins
    • 1
  • Tian Liu
    • 1
  • Walter J. Curran
    • 1
  • Weihua Zhou
    • 2
    Email author
  • Xiaofeng Yang
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Radiation Oncology and Winship Cancer InstituteEmory UniversityAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.School of ComputingUniversity of Southern MississippiLong BeachUSA
  3. 3.Department of CardiologyThe First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical UniversityNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations