Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Ann Nucl Med. 2015 Dec;29(10):911-20. doi: 10.1007/s12149-015-1021-3. Epub 2015 Sep 15.

Evaluation of bone scan index change over time on automated calculation in bone scintigraphy.

Author information

1
Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Showa-machi 3-39-22, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
2
Dr. Hasan Sadikin Central General Hospital, Jl. Dr. Pasteur No. 38, Bandung, 40161, Indonesia.
3
Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Showa-machi 3-39-22, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan. tetsuyah92md@gmail.com.
4
Department of Radiology, Gunma University Hospital, Showa-machi 3-39-15, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.
5
Department of Molecular Imaging, Gunma University Graduate School of Medicine, Showa-machi 3-39-22, Maebashi, Gunma, 371-8511, Japan.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Bone scintigraphy (bone scan) is useful in detecting metastatic bone lesions through visual assessment of hot spots. A semi-quantitative analysis method that evaluates bone scan images has been eagerly anticipated. BONENAVI is software that enables automatic assessment of bone scan index (BSI). BSI is useful for stratifying cancer patients and monitoring their therapeutic response. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the BONENAVI reading in determining BSI and hot spots at different time intervals after radioisotope injection.

METHODS:

We evaluated 32 patients, including 22 males and 10 females. Ten patients had breast cancer, 20 patients had prostate cancer, and 2 had malignant pheochromocytoma. Patients were injected with 740 MBq of (99m)Tc-methylene diphosphonate and bone scintigraphy was performed at 2, 4, and 6 h after injection on each patient. The BSI and the number of hot spots were obtained from BONENAVI software. Bone scan images were also visually assessed to exclude false positives due to artifacts. Analyses were performed in all lesions, selected true lesions, segment based and cancer type based. Non-parametric statistical analyses for pairwise multiple group comparison were performed using Friedman test followed with post hoc analysis.

RESULTS:

The BSIs and the number of hot spots were significantly increased with time, with significant differences between each of time points (P < 0.001). Analysis of regional BSI (rBSI) and hot spot number changes of selected 15 true lesions also showed similar increase (P < 0.001). In general, the pelvic segment was the most prone to rBSI changes and the chest segment was the most prone to hot spot number changes. Visual assessment showed that BONENAVI diagnosed some typical artifacts as metastases (hot spots).

CONCLUSION:

BONENAVI reading of BSIs and hot spot numbers was highly affected by acquisition time. In serial or follow-up examinations (in particular, for monitoring therapeutic efficacy), acquisition time should be fixed for each patient. Cautious interpretation should be made on segments with high physiological uptake. BONENAVI reading was prone to misinterpretation of artifacts. Visual assessment is necessary to rule out this possibility.

KEYWORDS:

BONENAVI; Bone scan index; Bone scintigraphy; Computer-assisted diagnostic software

PMID:
26373556
DOI:
10.1007/s12149-015-1021-3
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center