Retrospective fractional dose reduction in Tc-99m cardiac perfusion SPECT/CT patients: A human and model observer study.

BACKGROUND: In the ongoing efforts to reduce cardiac perfusion dose (injected radioactivity) for conventional SPECT/CT systems, we performed a human observer study to confirm our clinical model observer findings that iterative reconstruction employing OSEM (ordered-subset expectation-maximization) at 25% of the full dose (quarter-dose) has a similar performance for detection of hybrid cardiac perfusion defects as FBP at full dose. METHODS: One hundred and sixty-six patients, who underwent routine rest-stress Tc-99m sestamibi cardiac perfusion SPECT/CT imaging and clinically read as normally perfused, were included in the study. Ground truth was established by the normal read and the insertion of hybrid defects. In addition to the reconstruction of the 25% of full-dose data using OSEM with attenuation (AC), scatter (SC), and spatial resolution correction (RC), FBP and OSEM (with AC, SC, and RC) both at full dose (100%) were done. Both human observer and clinical model observer confidence scores were obtained to generate receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves in a task-based image quality assessment. RESULTS: Average human observer AUC (area under the ROC curve) values of 0.725, 0.876, and 0.890 were obtained for FBP at full dose, OSEM at 25% of full dose, and OSEM at full dose, respectively. Both OSEM strategies were significantly better than FBP with P values of 0.003 and 0.01 respectively, while no significant difference was recorded between OSEM methods (P = 0.48). The clinical model observer results were 0.791, 0.822, and 0.879, respectively, for the same patient cases and processing strategies used in the human observer study. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac perfusion SPECT/CT using OSEM reconstruction at 25% of full dose has AUCs larger than FBP and closer to those of full-dose OSEM when read by human observers, potentially replacing the higher dose studies during clinical reading.

Multicenter evaluation of stress-first myocardial perfusion image triage by nuclear technologists and automated quantification.

BACKGROUND: A stress-first myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) protocol saves time, is cost effective, and decreases radiation exposure. A limitation of this protocol is the requirement for physician review of the stress images to determine the need for rest images. This hurdle could be eliminated if an experienced technologist and/or automated computer quantification could make this determination. METHODS: Images from consecutive patients who were undergoing a stress-first MPI with attenuation correction at two tertiary care medical centers were prospectively reviewed independently by a technologist and cardiologist blinded to clinical and stress test data. Their decision on the need for rest imaging along with automated computer quantification of perfusion results was compared with the clinical reference standard of an assessment of perfusion images by a board-certified nuclear cardiologist that included clinical and stress test data. RESULTS: A total of 250 patients (mean age 61 years and 55% female) who underwent a stress-first MPI were studied. According to the clinical reference standard, 42 (16.8%) and 208 (83.2%) stress-first images were interpreted as "needing" and "not needing" rest images, respectively. The technologists correctly classified 229 (91.6%) stress-first images as either "needing" (n = 28) or "not needing" (n = 201) rest images. Their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were 66.7%, 96.6%, 80.0%, and 93.5%, respectively. An automated stress TPD score ≥1.2 was associated with optimal sensitivity and specificity and correctly classified 179 (71.6%) stress-first images as either "needing" (n = 31) or "not needing" (n = 148) rest images. Its sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 73.8%, 71.2%, 34.1%, and 93.1%, respectively. In a model whereby the computer or technologist could correct for the other's incorrect classification, 242 (96.8%) stress-first images were correctly classified. The composite sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 83.3%, 99.5%, 97.2%, and 96.7%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Technologists and automated quantification software had a high degree of agreement with the clinical reference standard for determining the need for rest images in a stress-first imaging protocol. Utilizing an experienced technologist and automated systems to screen stress-first images could expand the use of stress-first MPI to sites where the cardiologist is not immediately available for interpretation.