Quantification accuracy of neuro-oncology PET data as a function of emission scan duration in PET/MR compared to PET/CT |
| |
| Institution: | 1. QIMP group, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;2. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria;3. Sensors and Ultrasonics group, Institute of Applied Physics, Vienna University of Technology, Wiedner Hauptstraße 8-10/E134, 1040 Vienna, Austria;1. Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester, Groby Road, Leicester LE3 9QP, United Kingdom;2. Heartlands Hospitals, Heart of England NHS foundation Trust, Bordesley Green E, Birmingham B9 5SS, United Kingdom;3. Kettering General Hospital, Treatment Centre, Rothwell Rd, Kettering NN16 8UZ, United Kingdom;4. University Hospital of North Midlands, Newcastle Rd, Stoke-on-Trent, ST4 6QG, United Kingdom;5. Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester, Groby Road Leicester LE3 9QP, United Kingdom;6. Breast Unit, King’s Mill Hospital, Sherwood Forest Hospitals, Sutton-in-Ashfield, Nottinghamshire, NG17 4JL;1. Support Center for Advanced Neuroimaging – Institute for Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital Inselspital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland;2. Department of Radiology, Division of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland;3. Institute of Surgical Technology and Biomechanics, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland,;4. Department of Neurosurgery, University Hospital Inselspital and University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland;1. Centre for Applied Biomedical Engineering Research (CABER), Health Research Institute (HRI), School of Engineering, Bernal Institute, University of Limerick, Lonsdale Building, Limerick, Ireland;2. Department of Radiology, University Hospital Limerick, Ireland;3. Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Limerick, Ireland;1. Department of Radiological Science and Radiation Therapy, IEO European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy;2. Department of Oncology, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy;3. Università degli Studi di Milano, Postgraduation School in Radiodiagnostics, Milan, Italy;4. New Drugs and Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapies Division, IEO European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy;5. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, IEO European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy;6. Department of Clinical-Surgical, Diagnostic and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia and Division of Radiology, National Center of Oncological Hadrontherapy (CNAO Foundation), Italy;7. Present address: Department of Imaging, CDI Centro Diagnostico Italiano, Via Simone Saint Bon, Milan, Italy;1. Department of Radiology, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan;2. Research Park, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan;3. Department of Radiological Technology, Keio University Hospital, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan;4. Department of Radiology, Toho University Medical Center Omori Hospital, 6-11-1 Omori-nishi, Ota-ku, Tokyo, 143-8541, Japan;1. Faculty of Health Sciences and Brain and Mind Research Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia;2. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Geneva University Hospital, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland;3. Wolfson Molecular Imaging Centre, MAHSC, The University of Manchester, Manchester M20 3LJ, UK;4. School of Mathematics, The University of Manchester, Alan Turing Building, Manchester, UK;5. King''s College London, Lambeth Wing, St Thomas'', SE1 7EH, UK;6. Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | ObjectivesTo evaluate and compare the effect of reduced acquisition time, as a surrogate of injected activity, on the PET quantification accuracy in PET/CT and PET/MR imaging.MethodsTwenty min 18F-FDG phantom measurements and 10 min 18F-FET brain scans were acquired in a Biograph-True-Point-True-View PET/CT (n = 8) and a Biograph mMR PET/MR (n = 16). Listmode data were repeatedly split into frames of 1 min to 10 min length and reconstructed using two different reconstruction settings of a 3D-OSEM algorithm: with post-filtering (“OSEM”), and without post-filtering but with resolution recovery (“PSF”). Recovery coefficients (RCmax, RCA50) and standard uptake values (SUVmax, SUVA50) were evaluated.ResultsRCmax (phantom) and SUVmax (patients) increased significantly when reducing the frame duration. Significantly lower deviations were observed for RCA50 and SUVA50, respectively, making them more appropriate to compare PET studies at different number of counts. No statistical significant differences were observed when using post-filtering and reducing the frame time to 4 min (RCA50, reference 20 min, phantom) and to 3 min (SUVA50, reference 10 min, patients).ConclusionsFor hybrid aminoacid brain imaging, frame duration (or injected activity) can potentially be reduced to 30% of the standard used in clinical routine without significant changes on the quantification accuracy of the PET images if adequate reconstruction settings and quantitative measures are used. Frame times below 4 min in the NEMA phantom are not advisable to obtain quantitative and reproducible measures. |
| |
| Keywords: | Positron emission tomography PET/CT PET/MRI Radiation dose reduction SUV accuracy |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
