NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundMultiple-pinhole (MPH) collimators improve the resolution-sensitivity trade-off compared to parallel-hole collimators. This study evaluated the impact of MPH collimators on intra- and between-rater agreement, and on the certainty of visual interpretation in dopamine transporter (DAT)-SPECT.MethodsThe study included 71 patients (62.1 ± 12.7 y). Two SPECT acquisitions were performed in randomized order after a single injection of 182 ± 9 MBq 123I-FP-CIT, one with MPH and one with low-energy-high-resolution-high-sensitivity (LEHRHS) collimators. MPH projections were reconstructed with an iterative 3d Monte Carlo algorithm. LEHRHS projections were reconstructed with filtered backprojection (FBP) or with ordered-subsets expectation-maximization and resolution recovery (OSEM). Images were visually evaluated twice by three independent raters with respect to presence/absence of Parkinson-typical reduction of striatal 123I-FP-CIT uptake using a Likert 6-score (- 3 = clearly normal, …, 3 = clearly reduced). In case of intra-rater discrepancy, an intra-rater consensus was obtained. Intra- and between-rater agreement with respect to the Likert score (6-score and dichotomized score) was characterized by Cohen's kappa.ResultsIntra-rater kappa of visual scoring of MPH/LEHRHS-OSEM/LEHRHS-FBP images was 0.84 ± 0.12/0.73 ± 0.06/0.73 ± 0.08 (6-score, mean of three raters) and 1.00 ± 0.00/0.96 ± 0.04/0.97 ± 0.03 (dichotomized score). Between-rater kappa of visual scoring (intra-rater consensus) of MPH/LEHRHS-OSEM/LEHRHS-FBP images was 0.70 ± 0.06/0.63 ± 0.08/0.48 ± 0.05 (6-score, mean of three pairs of raters) and 1.00 ± 0.00/0.92 ± 0.04/0.90 ± 0.06 (dichotomized score). There was a decrease of (negative) Likert scores in normal DAT-SPECT by 0.87 ± 0.18 points from the LEHRHS-OSEM to the MPH setting. The (positive) Likert scores of reduced DAT-SPECT did not change on average.ConclusionsMPH collimators improve intra- and between-rater agreement as well as the certainty of the visual interpretation of DAT-SPECT.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.