Page 78 - ARNM-3-2
P. 78

Advances in Radiotherapy
            & Nuclear Medicine                                                Modeling renal TAC in dynamic scintigraphy



            sensitivity to subtle physiological variations, reflected in the   The findings of this study suggest that manual
            closer alignment of manually derived kinetic parameters   reconstruction and modeling of TACs could enhance
            (e.g., T  and T ) with expected renal physiology. 19  the diagnostic accuracy of dynamic renal scintigraphy,
                 max    1/2
              The comparative analysis of the kinetic parameters,   particularly in complex or borderline cases. The ability
            including T , T , and the 30-min min/max ratio,    to extract more physiologically relevant parameters
                      max
                           1/2
            revealed small yet significant differences between manual   could improve the detection of subtle renal dysfunctions
            and automatic methods. For example, in all analyzed cases,   and provide a more detailed assessment for treatment
                                                               planning. In clinical practice, this can be particularly
            manual reconstruction resulted in slightly higher T    advantageous in detecting early-stage renal dysfunction,
                                                        max
            values,  reflecting a potentially  more accurate depiction   assessing  post-transplant  renal  function,  or  identifying
            of tracer dynamics. Similarly, the improved correlation   subtle abnormalities that might be overlooked by machine-
            factors (R  and reduced χ  values) for the mathematical   generated TACs.
                                 2
                    2
            fitting function indicate the robustness of the proposed
            model in capturing physiological processes.        5. Conclusion
              The   proposed  empirical  mathematical  model   This study demonstrates the effectiveness of manual
            demonstrated excellent accuracy in modeling TACs, as   reconstruction and empirical modeling of TACs in dynamic
            evidenced by high R  and adjusted R  values. Parameters   renal scintigraphy. The manually established TACs provide
                                          2
                             2
            such as Cs and αs, derived from the fitting function, provided   more physiologically relevant insights compared to those
            insights into the pathological status of the kidneys. This   automatically generated by scintigraphy machines. By
            adaptability of the model highlights its potential utility in   leveraging gray-level data and a one-compartment model,
            clinical and research settings, including the evaluation of   the proposed approach achieved superior dynamic behavior
            new radiopharmaceuticals and the investigation of renal   and higher accuracy in extracting key kinetic parameters,
            pathophysiology.                                   such as T  and T . The fitting function developed in this
                                                                             1/2
                                                                      max
              One notable limitation of this study is the dependency   work proved robust, with excellent correlation coefficients
            of manual TAC reconstruction on the ROI selection   and goodness-of-fit metrics. These results highlight the
            method. While the rectangular ROI selection method   potential of manual TAC modeling in improving diagnostic
            used here ensured consistency, a free-hand approach   accuracy and exploring renal pathophysiology. Moreover,
            may offer even greater accuracy by better conforming to   the method offers a valuable framework for evaluating new
            kidney shapes. Future studies should explore the impact   radiopharmaceuticals and advancing clinical applications.
            of different ROI selection methods on the accuracy of   However, future work should address the limitations of
            TACs and kinetic parameters. In addition, extending   ROI selection methods and validate the findings across
            this methodology to a larger cohort with diverse renal   larger patient cohorts. Overall, this study advances the
            pathologies could validate its generalizability and clinical   understanding of renal function reconstruction and
            applicability. If accuracy is prioritized, the free-hand ROI   modeling, paving the path for enhanced clinical and
            selection method is preferable. However, if standardization   research applications in nuclear medicine.
            and reproducibility are the main concerns, the rectangular   Acknowledgments
            ROI selection method may still be useful. The presented
            comparison demonstrates how the choice of ROI selection   None.
            method can influence kinetic parameters in renal
            scintigraphy.                                      Funding
              The proposed manual method offers an alternative   None.
            approach to TAC reconstruction by leveraging gray-  Conflict of interest
            level values rather than direct radioactive counting.
            It  involves  several crucial  steps,  including image   The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
            acquisition, processing, ROI selection, data extraction,
            and TAC reconstruction. While this method enhances   Author contributions
            dynamic accuracy, future studies could focus on    Conceptualization: Faycal Kharfi
            minimizing inter-operator variability and evaluating   Investigation: All authors
            its applicability across diverse renal conditions and   Methodology: Faycal Kharfi
            imaging systems to improve generalizability to complex   Writing – original draft: Faycal Kharfi
            cases and pathologies.                             Writing – review & editing: Faycal Kharfi


            Volume 3 Issue 2 (2025)                         70                        doi: 10.36922/ARNM025070008
   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83