Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2003 Sep;31(3):157-60.

Evaluation of 2 scatter correction methods using a striatal phantom for quantitative brain SPECT

Affiliations
  • PMID: 12968046
Free article
Comparative Study

Evaluation of 2 scatter correction methods using a striatal phantom for quantitative brain SPECT

Douglass C Vines et al. J Nucl Med Technol. 2003 Sep.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: Scatter correction is an important factor in quantitative SPECT. In this study, we evaluated 2 methods of scatter correction for brain SPECT. The first is based on thresholding the energy spectrum (ES), and the second is based on a modification of the transmission-dependent convolution subtraction (TDCS) method.

Methods: SPECT imaging of a skull striatal phantom was performed using a triple-head camera with and without scatter correction. The striatal compartments were filled with (123)I, and the brain shell cavity (background) was filled with varying concentrations of (123)I to obtain striatal-to-background ratios of 2, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 to 1, respectively, which were considered to be the expected ratios. SPECT-measured ratios of striatal-to-background counts were determined with scatter correction (both ES and TDCS methods) and without scatter correction and were then compared with the expected ratios.

Results: Without scatter correction, measured striatal-to-background ratios were underestimated by an average of 41.7%, compared with the expected ratios. The ES method of scatter correction underestimated the striatal-to-background ratios by an average of 27.4%, a significant improvement (P < 0.04) over those without scatter correction. With the TDCS method of scatter correction, the ratios were underestimated by only 3.3% (P < 0.03). TDCS ratios were significantly (P < 0.04) higher than ES ratios and were nearly identical to the expected ratios.

Conclusion: These results suggest that scatter correction significantly improves the striatal-to-background ratios. The TDCS method appears to correct scatter more effectively than does the ES method for the striatal phantom, thus providing more accurate quantification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources