Pediatric 99mTc-MDP Bone SPECT with Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization Iterative Reconstruction with Isotropic 3D Resolution Recovery

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10100102

By using ordered subset expectation maximization with three-dimensional resolution recovery, improved image quality of technetium 99m methylene diphosphonate skeletal SPECT with either a 50% reduction in radiation dose, a 50% reduction in acquisition time, or a combination of both can be achieved.

Purpose

To perform a preliminary evaluation of the image quality of pediatric technetium 99m (99mTc) methylene diphosphonate (MDP) bone single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) by using iterative reconstruction—ordered subset expectation maximization with three-dimensional resolution recovery (OSEM-3D)—and to assess whether any improvements with use of this technique could lead to a reduction in patient dose or a shortening in imaging time.

Materials and Methods

Institutional advisory board approval was obtained for this investigation. Fifty 99mTc-MDP SPECT studies of the spine were evaluated (36 female and 14 male patients; mean age, 15.5 years). Each study was acquired by using a dual-detector camera, with each detector rotating 360°. By using filtered back projection (FBP) and OSEM-3D, images were reconstructed from data generated by both detectors. Likewise, OSEM-3D was used to reconstruct data from a single detector simulating half the administered radiopharmaceutical activity. Two nuclear medicine physicians, blinded to the patient data, reviewed the images for image quality in four different categories by using a four-point scale: artifacts (category 1), lesions (category 2), noise (category 3), and image sharpness (category 4).

Results

Compared with FBP, images reconstructed by using OSEM-3D with one or two detectors showed significant improvement in image quality with regard to lesion detection, noise level, and image sharpness (P < .02, .01, and .001, respectively). With OSEM-3D, no significant differences were observed when either one or two detectors were used.

Conclusion

Improved image quality of skeletal SPECT with either a 50% reduction in radiation dose or a 50% reduction in acquisition time or combination of the two can be achieved by using OSEM-3D.

© RSNA, 2010

References

  • 1 Motley G, Nyland J, Jacobs J, Caborn DN. The pars interarticularis stress reaction, spondylolysis, and spondylolisthesis progression. J Athl Train 1998;33(4):351–358. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Harvey J, Tanner S. Low back pain in young athletes: a practical approach. Sports Med 1991;12(6):394–406. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Buscombe JR, Townsend CE, Kouris K, et al.. Clinical high resolution skeletal single photon emission tomography using a triple-headed gamma camera. Br J Radiol 1993;66(789):817–822. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Collier BD, Johnson RP, Carrera GF, et al.. Painful spondylolysis or spondylolisthesis studied by radiography and single-photon emission computed tomography. Radiology 1985;154(1):207–211. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Bellah RD, Summerville DA, Treves ST, Micheli LJ. Low-back pain in adolescent athletes: detection of stress injury to the pars interarticularis with SPECT. Radiology 1991;180(2):509–512. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Takemitsu M, El Rassi G, Woratanarat P, Shah SA. Low back pain in pediatric athletes with unilateral tracer uptake at the pars interarticularis on single photon emission computed tomography. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31(8):909–914. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Anderson K, Sarwark JF, Conway JJ, Logue ES, Schafer MF. Quantitative assessment with SPECT imaging of stress injuries of the pars interarticularis and response to bracing. J Pediatr Orthop 2000;20(1):28–33. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Strobel K, Burger C, Seifert B, Husarik DB, Soyka JD, Hany TF. Characterization of focal bone lesions in the axial skeleton: performance of planar bone scintigraphy compared with SPECT and SPECT fused with CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2007;188(5):W467–W474. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Reinartz P, Schaffeldt J, Sabri O, et al.. Benign versus malignant osseous lesions in the lumbar vertebrae: differentiation by means of bone SPET. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(6):721–726. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Madsen MT. Recent advances in SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med 2007;48(4):661–673. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Miller TR, Wallis JW. Fast maximum-likelihood reconstruction. J Nucl Med 1992;33(9):1710–1711. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wallis JW, Miller TR. Rapidly converging iterative reconstruction algorithms in single-photon emission computed tomography. J Nucl Med 1993;34(10):1793–1800. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Hudson HM, Larkin RS. Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1994;13(4):601–609. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Brambilla M, Cannillo B, Dominietto M, Leva L, Secco C, Inglese E. Characterization of ordered-subsets expectation maximization with 3D post-reconstruction Gauss filtering and comparison with filtered backprojection in 99mTc SPECT. Ann Nucl Med 2005;19(2):75–82. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Römer W, Reichel N, Vija HA, et al.. Isotropic reconstruction of SPECT data using OSEM3D: correlation with CT. Acad Radiol 2006;13(4):496–502. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 DePuey EG, Gadiraju R, Clark J, Thompson L, Anstett F, Shwartz SC. Ordered subset expectation maximization and wide beam reconstruction “half-time” gated myocardial perfusion SPECT functional imaging: a comparison to “full-time” filtered backprojection. J Nucl Cardiol 2008;15(4):547–563. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Blocklet D, Seret A, Popa N, Schoutens A. Maximum-likelihood reconstruction with ordered subsets in bone SPECT. J Nucl Med 1999;40(12):1978–1984. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Koch W, Hamann C, Welsch J, Pöpperl G, Radau PE, Tatsch K. Is iterative reconstruction an alternative to filtered backprojection in routine processing of dopamine transporter SPECT studies? J Nucl Med 2005;46(11):1804–1811. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Sheehy N, Tetrault TA, Zurakowski D, Vija AH, Fahey FH, Treves ST. Pediatric 99mTc-DMSA SPECT performed by using iterative reconstruction with isotropic resolution recovery: improved image quality and reduced radiopharmaceutical activity. Radiology 2009;251(2):511–516. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Micheli LJ, Wood R. Back pain in young athletes: significant differences from adults in causes and patterns. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 1995;149(1):15–18. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Micheli LJ, Curtis C. Stress fractures in the spine and sacrum. Clin Sports Med 2006;25(1):75–88, ix. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 d’Hemecourt PA, Zurakowski D, Kriemler S, Micheli LJ. Spondylolysis: returning the athlete to sports participation with brace treatment. Orthopedics 2002;25(6):653–657. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Vija AH, Hawman EG, Engdahl JC. Analysis of a SPECT OSEM reconstruction method with 3D beam modeling and optional attenuation. In: Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2003 IEEE. Portland, OR: IEEE, 2003. Google Scholar
  • 24 Micheli LJ. Low back pain in the adolescent: differential diagnosis. Am J Sports Med 1979;7(6):362–364. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kim HJ, Green DW. Adolescent back pain. Curr Opin Pediatr 2008;20(1):37–45. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Tallarico RA, Madom IA, Palumbo MA. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in the athlete. Sports Med Arthrosc 2008;16(1):32–38. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Campbell RS, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, Papastefanou S, Greenough CG. Juvenile spondylolysis: a comparative analysis of CT, SPECT and MRI. Skeletal Radiol 2005;34(2):63–73. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Sarikaya I, Sarikaya A, Holder LE. The role of single photon emission computed tomography in bone imaging. Semin Nucl Med 2001;31(1):3–16. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Glantz SA. Primer of biostatistics. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2005. Google Scholar
  • 30 Conover WJ. Practical nonparametric statistics. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Wiley, 1999. Google Scholar
  • 31 Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley, 2000. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Standaert CJ, Herring SA. Expert opinion and controversies in sports and musculoskeletal medicine: the diagnosis and treatment of spondylolysis in adolescent athletes. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88(4):537–540. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, Scammell BE, Webb JF. The value of combining single photon emission computerised tomography and computerised tomography in the investigation of spondylolysis. Eur Spine J 2004;13(6):503–509. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fellander-Tsai L, Micheli LJ. Treatment of spondylolysis with external electrical stimulation and bracing in adolescent athletes: a report of two cases. Clin J Sport Med 1998;8(3):232–234. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Pettine KA, Salib RM, Walker SG. External electrical stimulation and bracing for treatment of spondylolysis: a case report. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18(4):436–439. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, Webb JK. Single photon emission computerized tomography and reverse gantry computerized tomography findings in patients with back pain investigated for spondylolysis. Clin J Sport Med 2005;15(2):79–86. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Pretorius PH, King MA, Pan TS, de Vries DJ, Glick SJ, Byrne CL. Reducing the influence of the partial volume effect on SPECT activity quantitation with 3D modelling of spatial resolution in iterative reconstruction. Phys Med Biol 1998;43(2):407–420. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Vija AH, Zeintl J, Chapman JT, Hawman EG. Development of rapid SPECT acquisition protocol for myocardial perfusion imaging. In: Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2006 IEEE. San Diego, CA: IEEE, 2006. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Robbins E. Radiation risks from imaging studies in children with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2008;51(4):453–457. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 40 National Research Council of the National Academies Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. BEIR VII, Phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006. Google Scholar
  • 41 Frush DP, Donnelly LF, Rosen NS. Computed tomography and radiation risks: what pediatric health care providers should know. Pediatrics 2003;112(4):951–957. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Wesolowski CA, Yahil A, Puetter RC, Babyn PS, Gilday DL, Khan MZ. Improved lesion detection from spatially adaptive, minimally complex, Pixon reconstruction of planar scintigraphic images. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2005;29(1):65–81. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357(22):2277–2284. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Received January 13, 2010; revision requested March 1; revision received May 25; accepted June 9; final version accepted June 23.
Published online: Dec 2010
Published in print: Dec 2010