Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of Two Different Segmentation Methods on Planar Lung Perfusion Scan with Reference to Quantitative Value on SPECT/CT.

PURPOSE: Until now, there was no single standardized regional segmentation method of planar lung perfusion scan. We compared planar scan based two segmentation methods, which are frequently used in the Society of Nuclear Medicine, with reference to the lung perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT)/computed tomography (CT) derived values in lung cancer patients.

METHODS: Fifty-five lung cancer patients (male:female, 37:18; age, 67.8 ± 10.7 years) were evaluated. The patients underwent planar scan and SPECT/CT after injection of technetium-99 m macroaggregated albumin (Tc-99 m-MAA). The % uptake and predicted postoperative percentage forced expiratory volume in 1 s (ppoFEV1%) derived from both posterior oblique (PO) and anterior posterior (AP) methods were compared with SPECT/CT derived parameters. Concordance analysis, paired comparison, reproducibility analysis and spearman correlation analysis were conducted.

RESULTS: The % uptake derived from PO method showed higher concordance with SPECT/CT derived % uptake in every lobe compared to AP method. Both methods showed significantly different lobar distribution of % uptake compared to SPECT/CT. For the target region, ppoFEV1% measured from PO method showed higher concordance with SPECT/CT, but lower reproducibility compared to AP method. Preliminary data revealed that every method significantly correlated with actual postoperative FEV1%, with SPECT/CT showing the best correlation.

CONCLUSION: The PO method derived values showed better concordance with SPECT/CT compared to the AP method. Both PO and AP methods showed significantly different lobar distribution compared to SPECT/CT. In clinical practice such difference according to different methods and lobes should be considered for more accurate postoperative lung function prediction.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app