Back

Quantitative Assessment of Dual and Triple Energy Window Scatter Correction in Myocardial Perfusion SPECT with a 4D Phantom

El Bab, M.; Guvenis, A.

2026-04-25 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.04.17.26351095 medRxiv
Show abstract

Conflicting evidence on scatter correction (SC) methods plagues quantitative myocardial perfusion SPECT (MPI), hindering standardized clinical protocols. This simulation study, utilizing the SIMIND Monte Carlo program and a highly realistic 4D XCAT phantom, systematically evaluates Dual Energy Window (DEW, with k=0.5) and Triple Energy Window (TEW) SC techniques. We uniquely investigate their performance across various photopeak window widths (2, 4, and 6 keV) and novel overlapped/non-overlapped configurations specifically for Tc 99m MPI - parameters largely unexplored in realistic cardiac models. Images were reconstructed with OSEM under uncorrected (UC), SC, and combined attenuation and scatter corrected (ACSC) conditions. Quantitative analysis focused on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), defect contrast, and relative noise to background (RNB). Our findings consistently show ACSCs superior performance in CNR, SNR, and defect contrast, confirming its critical role. Interestingly, SC alone reduced noise but compromised defect contrast relative to UC, highlighting a potential trade-off without attenuation correction. Crucially, this study reveals minimal influence of photopeak window width and overlap configuration on image quality, and no significant difference between DEW and TEW across most metrics. These results provide essential evidence for optimizing quantitative MPI protocols, suggesting that for Tc-99m, the choice between DEW and TEW, and specific window settings, may be less critical than ensuring robust attenuation correction.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
18.7%
2
Biomedical Optics Express
95 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.9%
3
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 18%
9.9%
4
Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.9%
5
Physics in Medicine & Biology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.1%
6
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
37 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.1%
50% of probability mass above
7
Medical Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
8
Cureus
68 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
9
NMR in Biomedicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
10
Talanta
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.1%
11
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering
40 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
12
European Radiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
13
Medical Image Analysis
35 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
14
Computers in Biology and Medicine
128 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
15
Frontiers in Physiology
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
Journal of Medical Imaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
17
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
41 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
18
MethodsX
16 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.5%
19
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
Journal of Biomedical Optics
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.1%
21
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.1%
22
Biology Methods and Protocols
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
23
Frontiers in Neurology
102 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
24
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.1%
25
NeuroImage
903 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.0%
26
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 64%
0.9%
28
Radiotherapy and Oncology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
29
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 13%
0.6%
30
Journal of the American Heart Association
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%