Abstract
Objective
Gated blood po ol single photon emission computed tomography (GBPS) offers the possibility of obtaining additional functional information from blood pool studies, including evaluation of left and right ventricular function simultaneously. The calculation of ventricular volumes based on the identification of the endocardial surface would be influenced by the spatial resolution in the reconstructed images. This study was performed to evaluate the effect of different filters on the right ventricular function.
Methods
The normal four-dimensional (4-D) NURBS-based cardiac-torso (NCAT) phantom with known right ventricular volume and ejection fraction was generated. The SIMIND Monte Carlo program was used to create projections. The studies were reconstructed by FBP and post-processing filtration such as Butterworth, Hanning, Shepp-Logan, Metz and Wiener in different statuses (cutoff and order). Using the Cedars–Sinai QBS (quantitative blood pool SPECT) package, the ventricular functional parameters were computed. The calculated values were analyzed and compared with the normal NCAT results.
Results
The results implied that the calculated right ventricular end diastolic volume (RVEDV) by Butterworth filtration (cutoff frequency = 0.3) agreed more with the NCAT Phantom characteristics [relative difference percentage (RDP) = 1.2 %], while the maximum accordance in the calculation of the RV ejection fraction (EF) (RDP = 3 %) was observed by Metz filter (FWHM 20 pixel). Also, the results of this study demonstrate that the Butterworth filter provided the most stable values (cutoff frequency = 0.4–0.5) in the estimation of RVEDV (RDP = 7.5 %). The Hanning and Shepp-Logan filters produced a much larger RDP, particularly in low frequency (41.1 and 21.5 %, respectively) compared to other filters.
Conclusions
This study demonstrated that the operation of different filters has a severe effect in computing right ventricular volume. The resolution recovery and Butterworth filters tend to give more comparable ventricular volumes with the actual normal NCAT value. Further evaluation using a large clinical database is underway to evaluate the optimum protocol in a clinical setting.
References
Ramani GV, Gurm G, Dilsizian V, Park MH. Noninvasive assessment of right ventricular function: will there be resurgence in radionuclide imaging techniques? Curr Cardiol Rep. 2010;12(2):162–9.
Greyson CR. Evaluation of right ventricular function. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2011;13(3):194–202.
Daou D, Van Kriekinge SD, Coaguila C, Lebtahi R, Fourme T, Sitbon O, Parent F, Slama M, Le Guludec D, Simonneau G. Automatic quantification of right ventricular function with gated blood pool SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 2004;11(3):293–304.
Nichols KJ, Van Tosh A, De Bondt P, Bergmann SR, Palestro CJ, Reichek N. Normal limits of gated blood pool SPECT count-based regional cardiac function parameters. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008;24(7):717–25.
Hebert T, Gopal S, Moore W, Wendt R, Ting Y, Murphy P, editors. Monte Carlo simulation of gated SPECT cardiac blood pool studies. Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference, 1994, IEEE Conference Record: IEEE.
King MA, Schwinger RB, Doherty PW, Penney BC. Two-dimensional filtering of SPECT images using the Metz and Wiener filters. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1984;25(11):1234–40.
Lyra M, Ploussi A. Filtering in SPECT image reconstruction. J Biomed Imaging. 2011;2011:10.
Tsui B. The AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents. Physics of SPECT. Radiographics. 1996;16(1):173–83.
Links JM, Jeremy RW, Dyer SM, Frank TL, Becker LC. Wiener filtering improves quantification of regional myocardial perfusion with thallium-201 SPECT. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 1990;31(7):1230–6.
Takavar A, Shamsipour G, Sohrabi M, Eftekhari M. Determination of optimum filter in myocardial SPECT: a phantom study. Iran J Radiat Res. 2004;1(4):205–10.
Vakhtangandze T, Hall D, Zananiri F, Rees M. The effect of Butterworth and Metz reconstruction filters on volume and ejection fraction calculations with 99Tcm gated myocardial SPECT. Br J Radiol. 2005;78(932):733–6.
Yusoff MNS, Zakaria A. Determination of the optimum filter for qualitative and quantitative 99mTc myocardial SPECT imaging. Iran J Radiat Res. 2009;6(4):173–81.
Manish O, Kheruka SC, Barai S, Gambhir S. Do reconstruction filters really effect the volume and ejection fraction calculation with 99mTc-sestamibi gated myocardial SPECT? Indian J Nucl Med IJNM Off J Soc Nucl Med India. 2010;25(4):156.
Wright GA, McDade M, Martin W, Hutton I. Quantitative gated SPECT: the effect of reconstruction filter on calculated left ventricular ejection fractions and volumes. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47(8):N99.
Marie P-Y, Djaballah W, Franken PR, Vanhove C, Muller MA, Boutley H, Poussier S, Olivier P, Karcher G, Bertrand A. OSEM reconstruction, associated with temporal Fourier and depth-dependant resolution recovery filtering, enhances results from sestamibi and 201Tl 16-interval gated SPECT. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(11):1789–95.
Yussoff MS, Zakaria A. Relationship between the optimum cut off frequency for Butterworth filter and lung-heart ratio in 99m Tc myocardial SPECT. Iran J Radiat Res. 2010;8(1):17–24.
Daou D, Kotbi O, Siano E, Coaguila C. Gated blood pool SPECT: better performance of QBS Software with iterative reconstruction combined to resolution recovery as compared to filtered backprojection. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(suppl_2):1727.
Karzoun S, Paul A, Anderson P, Erb D, Platt B, Nabi H. Effects of reconstruction on the electrocardiographic gated blood pool SPECT measurements. J Nucl Med Meet Abstr. 2006;47(suppl_1):534P-b.
Daou D, Tawileh M, Coaguila C. Gated blood pool SPECT processing with QBS software: does it perform better with iterative reconstruction and resolution recovery versus filtered backprojection? J Nucl Med Meet Abstr. 2011;52(1_MeetingAbstracts):1159.
Daou D, Kotbi O, Siano E, Coaguila C. Gated blood pool SPECT: QBS software performs better with iterative reconstruction than filtered backprojection. J Nucl Med Meet Abstr. 2013;54(2_MeetingAbstracts):1727.
Segars WP, Tsui B, Lalush D, Frey E, King M, Manocha D. Development and application of the new dynamic Nurbs-based Cardiac-Torso (NCAT) phantom. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:23.
Veress AI, Segars WP, Weiss JA, Tsui BM, Gullberg GT. Normal and pathological NCAT image and phantom data based on physiologically realistic left ventricle finite-element models. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006;25(12):1604–16.
Vanhove C, Walgraeve N, Everaert H, et al. Comparison between two automatic algorithms to determine left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction from gated blood pool tomography. J Nucl Med. 2001 (abstract);42(5):167.
Van Kriekinge SD, Berman DS, Germano G. Automatic quantification of left ventricular ejection fraction from gated blood pool SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol. 1999;6(5):498–506.
Mohseni S, Kamaliasl A, Bitarafan-Rajabi A, Entezarmahdi SM, Yaghoobi N, Shahpouri Z. The Effect of Filtrating and reconstruction method on ventricular function by the gated blood pool SPECT. EANM Congress 2013- October, 19–23 Lyon, France. 2013;TP037.
Kim S-J, Kim I-J, Kim Y-S, Kim Y-K, Shin YB, Kim D-S. Automatic quantification of right ventricular volumes and right ventricular ejection fraction with gated blood pool SPECT: comparison of 8-and 16-frame gated blood pool SPECT with first-pass radionuclide angiography. J Nucl Cardiol. 2005;12(5):553–9.
Oppenheim AV, Willsky AS, Nawab SH. Signals and systems. 2nd ed. NJ: Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs; 1983.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to Dr. Paul Segars for his helpful comments. We specially thank the partner and staff at the Cardiovascular Interventional Research Center, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical and Research Center, Rajaei Cardio-vascular Hospital for their assistance.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mohseni, S., Kamali-Asl, A., Bitarafan-Rajabi, A. et al. Effects of filtration on right ventricular function by the gated blood pool SPECT. Ann Nucl Med 29, 384–390 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-015-0949-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-015-0949-7