Comparative Assessment of Agreement in Uniformity Analyses across Quality Control Software Platforms.

IF 0.9 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING World Journal of Nuclear Medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-19 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1055/s-0044-1795102
Thasmeera T Supramaniam, Muhammad Y Udin, Marianie Musarudin
{"title":"Comparative Assessment of Agreement in Uniformity Analyses across Quality Control Software Platforms.","authors":"Thasmeera T Supramaniam, Muhammad Y Udin, Marianie Musarudin","doi":"10.1055/s-0044-1795102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective</b>  In nuclear medicine, quality control (QC) activities adhere to international standards, yet their complexity can pose challenges. Gamma camera manufacturers have introduced integrated QC software, offering instantaneous results. However, the agreement of these automated processes with established protocols remains uncertain. This study aims to clarify this uncertainty by comparatively analyzing uniformity from various software solutions for a dual-head gamma camera. <b>Methods</b>  The study utilized integrated QC analysis software and three free QC analysis tools (IAEA-NMQC Toolkit, NM Toolkit, and Fiji) for uniformity analyses. Following the National Electrical Manufacturers Association standards, NEMA Standards Publication NU 1-2018, the intrinsic uniformity test was performed on a GE Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro system. Ten uniformity QC images underwent analysis with both integrated QC software and alternative software. Data agreements were tested using the Blant-Altman regression-based analysis. <b>Results</b>  Significant differences were observed in integral and differential uniformities ( <i>p</i>  < 0.001). The central field of view (useful field of view) integral uniformity mean differences for NMQC Toolkit, NM Toolkit, and Fiji were 2.46% (2.34%), 2.44% (2.31%), and 2.56% (2.64%), respectively. Conversely, x-differential and y-differential uniformity mean differences were consistently under 2%. Regression-based analysis confirmed good agreement between computed values. <b>Conclusion</b>  The integrated QC software of Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro provides reliable uniformity analysis, aligned with the NEMA standards. Variations in computed values may stem from differences in pixel values and applied data corrections.</p>","PeriodicalId":23742,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Nuclear Medicine","volume":"24 1","pages":"47-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11828643/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Nuclear Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1795102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective  In nuclear medicine, quality control (QC) activities adhere to international standards, yet their complexity can pose challenges. Gamma camera manufacturers have introduced integrated QC software, offering instantaneous results. However, the agreement of these automated processes with established protocols remains uncertain. This study aims to clarify this uncertainty by comparatively analyzing uniformity from various software solutions for a dual-head gamma camera. Methods  The study utilized integrated QC analysis software and three free QC analysis tools (IAEA-NMQC Toolkit, NM Toolkit, and Fiji) for uniformity analyses. Following the National Electrical Manufacturers Association standards, NEMA Standards Publication NU 1-2018, the intrinsic uniformity test was performed on a GE Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro system. Ten uniformity QC images underwent analysis with both integrated QC software and alternative software. Data agreements were tested using the Blant-Altman regression-based analysis. Results  Significant differences were observed in integral and differential uniformities ( p  < 0.001). The central field of view (useful field of view) integral uniformity mean differences for NMQC Toolkit, NM Toolkit, and Fiji were 2.46% (2.34%), 2.44% (2.31%), and 2.56% (2.64%), respectively. Conversely, x-differential and y-differential uniformity mean differences were consistently under 2%. Regression-based analysis confirmed good agreement between computed values. Conclusion  The integrated QC software of Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro provides reliable uniformity analysis, aligned with the NEMA standards. Variations in computed values may stem from differences in pixel values and applied data corrections.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨质量控制软件平台一致性分析一致性的比较评估。
目的在核医学中,质量控制(QC)活动遵循国际标准,但其复杂性可能带来挑战。伽马相机制造商推出了集成的QC软件,提供即时结果。然而,这些自动化过程与既定协议的一致性仍然不确定。本研究旨在通过比较分析双头伽马相机的各种软件解决方案的均匀性来澄清这种不确定性。方法采用集成的QC分析软件和3种免费的QC分析工具(IAEA-NMQC Toolkit、NM Toolkit和Fiji)进行均匀性分析。根据美国国家电气制造商协会标准NEMA标准出版物NU 1-2018,在GE Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro系统上进行了内在均匀性测试。采用集成QC软件和替代软件对10张均匀性QC图像进行分析。使用基于Blant-Altman回归分析对数据一致性进行检验。结论Discovery NM/CT 670 Pro集成QC软件提供可靠的均匀性分析,符合NEMA标准。计算值的变化可能源于像素值和应用数据校正的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Journal of Nuclear Medicine
World Journal of Nuclear Medicine RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
自引率
16.70%
发文量
118
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊最新文献
ARTnet Perspectives and Contributions to Theranostics. Radiotheranostics in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Challenges, Practice, and Prospects. Individualized Dosimetry to Guide LuTATE Therapy in Pediatric Neuroblastoma. Theranostics Implementation: Opportunities and Challenges. Multidisciplinary Perspectives of Clinical Trials in Theranostics.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1