« Back
Comparison of Supine / Prone Imaging with Profile Attenuation Correction for Identification and Correction of Attenuation Artifacts
Poster Title: Comparison of Supine / Prone Imaging with Profile Attenuation Correction for Identification and Correction of Attenuation Artifacts
Submitted on 02 Nov 2017
Author(s): Dr. Abdul Rehman Tahir
Affiliations: NHS
This poster was presented at BIR Annual Congress 2017
Poster Views: 983
View poster »

Poster Information
Abstract: Although myocardial perfusion imaging with single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) is an accurate and reliable diagnostic study, artifacts must be avoided, or detected and corrected, to minimize the rate of false-positive results. We aimed to compare supine uncorrected (NC) and attenuation correction (AC) via Gadolinium-153 (Gd-153)-based attenuation maps with prone SPECT imaging. METHODS: A total of 40 consecutive patients referred for stress/rest Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (MPI) were included in this study. Transmission source used was Gd-153 line source and emission sources were Technitium-99m Methoxy Isobutyl Isonitrile (MIBI) and Thalllium-201. In supine position simultaneous or sequential transmission emission protocol (STEP) was carried out for Tc-99m MIBI and Tl-201 respectively. NC, AC MPI data was acquired. In addition patients were imaged in prone position too. Data was analyzed visually and by Cedars Quantitative Perfusion SPECT (QPS). 20 segment cardiac model was used to analyze the data and percentage uptake (%U) in all 20 cardiac segments was noted and compared (NC/AC, NC/Prone &AC/Prone. Student t test was applied on the data. RESULTS: In males anterior wall showed more improvement in mean of %U with prone positioning than AC but insignificant difference (p>.05) was noticed in their means for both in Tl-201 MPI and Tc-99m MIBI MPI. In males inferior wall, AC images showed more mean %U than in prone data (p<.001) in all pairs for both in Tl-201 MPI and Tc-99m MIBI MPI except in Tl-201 stress MPI study where prone images showed improved %U (p<.001). In females anterior wall %U was improved more with prone positioning than AC both in MIBI (p<.05) and Tl-201(p<.05). In females mean of %U in inferior wall was significantly improved with AC in MIBI stress data (p<.001) but in rest study with Tc-99m MIBI correction improvement in mean of %U was just significant in prone (p=.05) CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, interpretation with all the 16 sets of supine AC /prone revealed that in 9 out of 16 sets attenuation was better corrected by prone as compared to AC. 7 showed more improvement with AC. It is recommended that the method of attenuation correction should be according to nature of artifact encountered, its anatomic location and radiopharmaceutical used Summary: A head to head comparison between two validated methods for correction of attenuation artifacts encountered in Myocardial Perfusion Imaging.References: East of England, NHS, UKReport abuse »
Ask the author a question about this poster.
Ask a Question »

Creative Commons

Related Posters

Etiological diagnostics of cardiomyopathies in the cardiology unit of the HUEH internal medicine department during the period from 8 January 2014 to 14 June 2014
*Axler JEAN PAUL; **Lesly Ed. ARCHER; *Raema Mimrod JEAN; *Gerald VERNELUS; *Rodolph MALEBRANCHE

Medical Student: Move over Stem Cells – Exosomes are Here! What are Exosomes & their role in Regenerative Medicine?
Amartej Singh Deol MD4 & Advisor: Shivinder S. Deol MD

Briand Bounkeu MD; Ravi Shekarappa MD; La Toya Jackson DO, FAAFP; Chinedu Ivonye MD, FACP; Cristal Kudiwu MD

Chronic Recurrent Multifocal Osteomyelitis Involving the Mandible
Alamoudi, A*; Panneer Selvam, N; Hansen, M; Ruprecht, A; Kashtwari, D

Striving for Equity in Surgical, Anesthesia, and Obstetric Research in Haiti: A Multi-Partner, International Research Training Collaboration
Dr. Jean Alouidor*, Dr. Frédéric Barau Déjean*, Dr. Louis-Franck Télémaque, Dr. Ronald Eveillard, Dr. Laëlle Mangurat, Dr. Isaac Martineau, Dr. Chartelin Jean Isaac, Dr. Darlène Rochelin Paultre, Carine Réveil Jean-Baptiste, Dr. Lucile Louis Riché, Dr. Jordan Pyda, Rolvix Patterson III, Dr. Blake Alkire, Dr. Eunice Dérivois-Mérisier (*Co-First Authors)