3.12

Wide beam reconstruction “quarter-time” gated myocardial perfusion SPECT functional imaging: a comparison to “full-time” ordered subset expectation maximum

“…[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12] In the present study, perfusion defect extent and severity assessed by visual analysis by expert observers and quantified using a standard 17-segment model (SSSs, SRSs, and SDSs) were also no different for ''quarter-time'' WBR compared to ''full-time'' OSEM. However, the number of patients with perfusion abnormalities was relatively limited (n = 45); therefore, conclusions regarding characterization of perfusion defects and associated wall motion abnormalities with ''quarter-time'' WBR are somewhat limited.…”

“…We and other investigators have reported that compared to filtered back projection (FBP), WBR, which models noise in the reconstruction process, maintains or even improves myocardial perfusion SPECT quality, even with lower count density ''halftime'' acquisitions. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12] Because the WBR algorithm has the potential to cope with even lower count density data with higher noise content, we postulated that this new software method could be further modified to provide diagnostic quality gated myocardial perfusion SPECT with even shorter, ''quarter-time'' stress and rest acquisitions. 13,14 Based on phantom studies and pilot patient results, the WBR approach was optimized to address quarter-time statistics.…”