Skip to main content
Log in

“Same-Patient Processing” for multiple cardiac SPECT studies. 1. Improving LV segmentation accuracy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology Aims and scope

Abstract

Objectives

This paper describes a novel approach (same-patient processing, or SPP) aimed at improving left ventricular segmentation accuracy in patients with multiple SPECT studies, and evaluates its performance compared to conventional processing in a large population of 962 patients undergoing rest and stress electrocardiography-gated SPECT MPI, for a total of 5,772 image datasets (6 per patient).

Methods

Each dataset was independently processed using a standard algorithm, and a shape quality control score (SQC) was produced for every segmentation. Datasets with a SQC score higher than a specific threshold, suggesting algorithmic failure, were automatically reprocessed with the SPP-modified algorithm, which incorporates knowledge of the segmentation mask location in the other datasets belonging to the same patient. Experienced operators blinded as to whether datasets had been processed based on the standard or SPP approach assessed segmentation success/failure for each dataset.

Results

The SPP approach reduced segmentation failures from 219/5772 (3.8%) to 42/5772 (0.7%) overall, with particular improvements in attenuation corrected (AC) datasets with high extra-cardiac activity (from 100/962 (10.4%) to 12/962 (1.4%) for rest AC, and from 41/962 (4.3%) to 9/962 (0.9%) for stress AC). The number of patients who had at least one of their 6 datasets affected by segmentation failure decreased from 141/962 (14.7%) to 14/962 (1.7%) using the SPP approach.

Conclusion

Whenever multiple image datasets for the same patient exist and need to be processed, it is possible to deal with the images as a group rather than individually. The same-patient processing approach can be implemented automatically, and may substantially reduce the need for manual reprocessing due to cardiac segmentation failure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

SPP:

Same-patient processing

SPECT:

Single photon emission computed tomography

MPI:

Myocardial perfusion imaging

LV:

Left ventricle

AC:

Attenuation corrected

SQC:

Shape quality control

References

  1. Slomka PJ, Nishina H, Berman DS, Kang XP, Friedman JD, Hayes SW, et al. Automatic quantification of myocardial perfusion stress-rest change: A new measure of ischemia. J Nucl Med 2004;45:183–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Slomka PJ, Pan T, Berman DS, Germano G. Advances in SPECT and PET hardware. Progr Cardiovasc Dis 2015;57:566–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Einstein AJ, Pascual TNB, Mercuri M, Karthikeyan G, Vitola JV, Mahmarian JJ, et al. Current worldwide nuclear cardiology practices and radiation exposure: results from the 65 country IAEA Nuclear Cardiology Protocols Cross-Sectional Study (INCAPS). Eur Heart J 2015;36:1689–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Slomka PJ, Fish MB, Lorenzo S, Nishina H, Gerlach J, Berman DS, et al. Simplified normal limits and automated quantitative assessment for attenuation-corrected myocardial perfusion SPECT. J Nucl Cardiol 2006;13:642–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Chen J, Waechter P, Su HT, Kiat H, et al. Operator-less processing of myocardial perfusion SPECT studies. J Nucl Med 1995;36:2127–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Arsanjani R, Xu Y, Hayes SW, Fish M, Lemley M, Gerlach J, et al. Comparison of fully automated computer analysis and visual scoring for detection of coronary artery disease from myocardial perfusion SPECT in a large population. J Nucl Med 2013;54:221–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Slomka PJ, Van Kriekinge SD, Pollard G, Berman DS. Quantitation in gated perfusion SPECT imaging: The Cedars-Sinai approach. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:433–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Garcia EV, Faber TL, Cooke CD, Folks RD, Chen J, Santana C. The increasing role of quantification in clinical nuclear cardiology: The Emory approach. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:420–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ficaro EP, Lee BC, Kritzman JN, Corbett JR. Corridor4DM: The Michigan method for quantitative nuclear cardiology. J Nucl Cardiol 2007;14:455–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Germano G, Kavanagh PB, Su HT, Mazzanti M, Kiat H, Hachamovitch R, et al. Automatic reorientation of three-dimensional, transaxial myocardial perfusion SPECT images. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1107–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported in part by Grant R01HL089765 from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute/National Institutes of Health (NHLBI/NIH). Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the NHLBI/NIH.

Disclosure

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center receives royalties for the licensing of software and algorithms related to the quantitative assessment of perfusion, function and other cardiac parameters, a minority portion of which is distributed to some of the authors of this manuscript (Guido Germano, Paul B. Kavanagh, Daniel S. Berman and Piotr J. Slomka).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guido Germano PhD.

Additional information

See related editorial, doi:10.1007/s12350-016-0703-0.

The authors of this article have provided a PowerPoint file, available for download at SpringerLink, which summarises the contents of the paper and is free for re-use at meetings and presentations. Search for the article DOI on SpringerLink.com.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 412 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Germano, G., Kavanagh, P.B., Fish, M.B. et al. “Same-Patient Processing” for multiple cardiac SPECT studies. 1. Improving LV segmentation accuracy. J. Nucl. Cardiol. 23, 1435–1441 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0673-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12350-016-0673-2

Key Words

Navigation