Comparison of visual interpretation of [I-123] FP-CIT SPECT scans versus reference-based quantitative analysis utilizing a Japanese normal database.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Ryo Yamakuni, Shiro Ishii, Kenji Fukushima, Takeyasu Kakamu, Masanori Yusa, Katsuyuki Kikori, Tensho Yamao, Noriyuki Takahashi, Hirofumi Sekino, Shuntaro Itagaki, Itaru Miura, Hiroshi Ito
{"title":"Comparison of visual interpretation of [I-123] FP-CIT SPECT scans versus reference-based quantitative analysis utilizing a Japanese normal database.","authors":"Ryo Yamakuni, Shiro Ishii, Kenji Fukushima, Takeyasu Kakamu, Masanori Yusa, Katsuyuki Kikori, Tensho Yamao, Noriyuki Takahashi, Hirofumi Sekino, Shuntaro Itagaki, Itaru Miura, Hiroshi Ito","doi":"10.1097/MNM.0000000000001968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Dopamine transporter single-photon emission computed tomography (DAT-SPECT) plays an important role in diagnosing parkinsonism. Recently, a reference-based quantitative analysis utilizing a Japanese normal database for DAT-SPECT was developed. This study aimed to investigate the frequency and trends of cases wherein the analysis- and physician-based diagnoses diverged.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two physicians performed an interpretation task twice on 195 DAT-SPECT scans. After assessing intra- and intertester agreements, disagreements were resolved by consensus. For the reference-based quantitative analysis, the calibrated specific binding ratio (cSBR), calibrated asymmetry index (cAI), and Z-scores were measured. Images were grouped according to physician consensus and the negative-positive difference from thresholds (Z-score of less than -2.0 and/or cAI of more than 12.22) as follows: group 1 (physician, normal; quantitative analysis, normal; n = 70), group 2 (abnormal; normal; n = 4), group 3 (normal; abnormal; n = 31), and group 4 (abnormal; abnormal; n = 90).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median cSBRs and Z-scores decreased in order from group 1 to group 4. Median cAI values increased in the order of groups 1, 3, 2, and 4. Significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 for cSBRs and cAIs; groups 2 and 3 for Z-scores; groups 2 and 4 for cSBRs and Z-scores; and groups 1 and 3, 1 and 4, and 3 and 4 for all parameters (Kruskal-Wallis and Steel-Dwass tests).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In approximately 18% of cases, the visual interpretation of physicians diverged from the reference-based quantitative analysis based on a Japanese normal database. It is crucial to appropriately utilize DAT-SPECT reference-based quantitative analysis as a diagnostic aid.</p>","PeriodicalId":19708,"journal":{"name":"Nuclear Medicine Communications","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nuclear Medicine Communications","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MNM.0000000000001968","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Dopamine transporter single-photon emission computed tomography (DAT-SPECT) plays an important role in diagnosing parkinsonism. Recently, a reference-based quantitative analysis utilizing a Japanese normal database for DAT-SPECT was developed. This study aimed to investigate the frequency and trends of cases wherein the analysis- and physician-based diagnoses diverged.

Methods: Two physicians performed an interpretation task twice on 195 DAT-SPECT scans. After assessing intra- and intertester agreements, disagreements were resolved by consensus. For the reference-based quantitative analysis, the calibrated specific binding ratio (cSBR), calibrated asymmetry index (cAI), and Z-scores were measured. Images were grouped according to physician consensus and the negative-positive difference from thresholds (Z-score of less than -2.0 and/or cAI of more than 12.22) as follows: group 1 (physician, normal; quantitative analysis, normal; n = 70), group 2 (abnormal; normal; n = 4), group 3 (normal; abnormal; n = 31), and group 4 (abnormal; abnormal; n = 90).

Results: Median cSBRs and Z-scores decreased in order from group 1 to group 4. Median cAI values increased in the order of groups 1, 3, 2, and 4. Significant differences were observed between groups 1 and 2 for cSBRs and cAIs; groups 2 and 3 for Z-scores; groups 2 and 4 for cSBRs and Z-scores; and groups 1 and 3, 1 and 4, and 3 and 4 for all parameters (Kruskal-Wallis and Steel-Dwass tests).

Conclusion: In approximately 18% of cases, the visual interpretation of physicians diverged from the reference-based quantitative analysis based on a Japanese normal database. It is crucial to appropriately utilize DAT-SPECT reference-based quantitative analysis as a diagnostic aid.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
212
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Nuclear Medicine Communications, the official journal of the British Nuclear Medicine Society, is a rapid communications journal covering nuclear medicine and molecular imaging with radionuclides, and the basic supporting sciences. As well as clinical research and commentary, manuscripts describing research on preclinical and basic sciences (radiochemistry, radiopharmacy, radiobiology, radiopharmacology, medical physics, computing and engineering, and technical and nursing professions involved in delivering nuclear medicine services) are welcomed, as the journal is intended to be of interest internationally to all members of the many medical and non-medical disciplines involved in nuclear medicine. In addition to papers reporting original studies, frankly written editorials and topical reviews are a regular feature of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信