SCIENTIFIC HUB

Araştırmanın izini sürün.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

⁇ sup>123 ⁇ /sup>I-FP-CIT SPECT ile odaklanmış striatum görüntüleme için konvolutional sinir ağı tabanlı zayıflama düzeltmesi.

Convolutional neural network based attenuation correction for<sup>123</sup>I-FP-CIT SPECT with focused striatum imaging.

Makine çevirisi · Editoryal inceleme bekliyor

Phys Med Biol · 2021-09-24

DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac2470PMID: 34492646

Erişim kaynaktan kontrol edilmeliResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Journal ArticleKaynağa git ↗

Araştırma özeti

Aşağıdaki metin kaynak makalenin lisansı doğrulanmış orijinal özetidir. cc by

SPECT imaging with123I-FP-CIT is used for diagnosis of neurodegenerative disorders like Parkinson's disease. Attenuation correction (AC) can be useful for quantitative analysis of123I-FP-CIT SPECT. Ideally, AC would be performed based on attenuation maps (μ-maps) derived from perfectly registered CT scans. Suchμ-maps, however, are most times not available and possible errors in image registration can induce quantitative inaccuracies in AC corrected SPECT images. Earlier, we showed that a convolutional neural network (CNN) based approach allows to estimate SPECT-alignedμ-maps for full brain perfusion imaging using only emission data. Here we investigate the feasibility of similar CNN methods for axially focused123I-FP-CIT scans. We tested our approach on a high-resolution multi-pinhole prototype clinical SPECT system in a Monte Carlo simulation study. Three CNNs that estimateμ-maps in a voxel-wise, patch-wise and image-wise manner were investigated. As the added value of AC on clinical123I-FP-CIT scans is still debatable, the impact of AC was also reported to check in which cases CNN based AC could be beneficial. AC using the ground truthμ-maps (GT-AC) and CNN estimatedμ-maps (CNN-AC) were compared with the case when no AC was done (No-AC). Results show that the effect of using GT-AC versus CNN-AC or No-AC on striatal shape and symmetry is minimal. Specific binding ratios (SBRs) from localized regions show a deviation from GT-AC≤2.5% for all three CNN-ACs while No-AC systematically underestimates SBRs by 13.1%. A strong correlation (r≥0.99) was obtained between GT-AC based SBRs and SBRs from CNN-ACs and No-AC. Absolute quantification (in kBq ml-1) shows a deviation from GT-AC within 2.2% for all three CNN-ACs and of 71.7% for No-AC. To conclude, all three CNNs show comparable performance in accurateμ-map estimation and123I-FP-CIT quantification. CNN-estimatedμ-map can be a promising substitute for CT-basedμ-map.

Bilimsel değerlendirme

01

Araştırma sorusu

Sorunun kapsamı orijinal çalışma üzerinden değerlendirilir.

02

Yöntem ve örneklem

Çalışma tasarımı ve örneklem için kaynak makaleyi kontrol edin.

03

Temel bulgular

Bu kayıt için editoryal olarak onaylanmış bulgu özeti henüz yayımlanmadı.

04

Sınırlılıklar

Sonuçların genellenebilirliği, yanlılık ve klinik anlamı ayrıca incelenmelidir.

Bibliyografik veriden yöntem, örneklem veya klinik sonuç çıkarımı yapılmaz.