Affiliation:
1. Chiba University Hospital
2. Department of Quantum Medical Technology, Institute of Medical, Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences, Kanazawa University
3. Kanazawa University
4. Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Radiation Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University
Abstract
Abstract
Objective To improve image quality for low-count bone scintigraphy whole-body images using deep learning and evaluate their applicability in clinical practice.Methods Five hundred fifty patients were included in the study. Low-count Original images (75%, 50%, 25%, 10%, and 5% counts) were generated from Reference images (100% counts) using Poisson resampling. Patients were randomly divided into training (500) and evaluation (50) groups. Output (DL-filtered) images were obtained after training with U-Net using Reference images as teacher data. Gaussian-filtered images were generated for comparison. Peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity (SSIM) to the Reference image were calculated to determine image quality. Artificial neural network (ANN) value, bone scan index (BSI), and number of hotspots (Hs) were computed using BONENAVI analysis for patients with and without bone metastases, to assess diagnostic performance. Accuracy of bone metastasis detection and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated. Original, Gaussian-filtered, and DL-filtered images were compared with Reference images.Results PSNR and SSIM for DL-filtered images were highest in all count percentages. BONENAVI analysis values for DL-filtered images did not differ significantly regardless of the presence or absence of bone metastases. BONENAVI analysis values for Original and Gaussian-filtered images differed significantly at < 25% counts in patients without bone metastases. In patients with bone metastases, BSI and Hs for Original and Gaussian-filtered images differed significantly at < 10% counts, whereas ANN values did not. Accuracy of bone metastasis detection was highest for DL-filtered images in all count percentages; AUC did not differ significantly. Accuracy of Original and Gaussian-filtered images worsened with decreasing count percentage; AUC differed significantly for Original images at < 50% counts and for Gaussian-filtered images at < 25% counts.Conclusions Our deep learning model improved image quality and bone metastasis detection accuracy for low-count bone scintigraphy whole-body images, suggesting its applicability in clinical practice.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference31 articles.
1. Bone Metastases: An Overview;Macedo F;Oncol Rev,2017
2. Current role of bone scan with phosphonates in the follow-up of breast cancer;Maffioli L;Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging,2004
3. Nuclear medicine imaging of posttraumatic osteomyelitis;Govaert GAM;Eur J Trauma and Emerg Surg,2016
4. Bone scan in metabolic bone diseases;Abdelrazek S;Rev Nucl Med Rev Cent East Eur,2012
5. SPECT/CT in the Evaluation of Suspected Skeletal Pathology;Koppula BR;Tomography,2021