Joseph A Thie1, Karl F Hubner, Gary T Smith. 1. Biomedical Imaging Center, Department of Radiology, The University of Tennessee Medical Center at Knoxville, Knoxville, TN, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The potential for improving the diagnostic performance of static positron imaging tomography (PET) by judiciously choosing optimum post-injection imaging times is investigated. PROCEDURES: Dynamic and whole-body scan data, from 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) oncological studies, are analyzed for changing standardized uptake value (SUV) behavior with increasing post-injection times at either single- or multiple-bed positions. Model-based interpretations address d(SUV)/dt, shown to correlate with SUV, and the contrast ratio for a tumor and its surroundings. A method for correcting measurements to a standardized time is given. RESULTS: Both data and model-based equations suggest that starting data acquisition later than the average 55 +/- 15 (SD) minutes post-injection reported in the FDG literature can improve contrast ratios. Considerations for choosing an optimum time from a clinical standpoint are listed. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that the appropriate time for each particular protocol can be found with the aid of the information presented here. True optimization, however, remains a complex issue.
PURPOSE: The potential for improving the diagnostic performance of static positron imaging tomography (PET) by judiciously choosing optimum post-injection imaging times is investigated. PROCEDURES: Dynamic and whole-body scan data, from 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) oncological studies, are analyzed for changing standardized uptake value (SUV) behavior with increasing post-injection times at either single- or multiple-bed positions. Model-based interpretations address d(SUV)/dt, shown to correlate with SUV, and the contrast ratio for a tumor and its surroundings. A method for correcting measurements to a standardized time is given. RESULTS: Both data and model-based equations suggest that starting data acquisition later than the average 55 +/- 15 (SD) minutes post-injection reported in the FDG literature can improve contrast ratios. Considerations for choosing an optimum time from a clinical standpoint are listed. CONCLUSIONS: It is concluded that the appropriate time for each particular protocol can be found with the aid of the information presented here. True optimization, however, remains a complex issue.
Authors: Scott D Wollenweber; Gaspar Delso; Timothy Deller; David Goldhaber; Martin Hüllner; Patrick Veit-Haibach Journal: MAGMA Date: 2013-06-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Pavlos P Kafouris; Iosif P Koutagiar; Alexandros T Georgakopoulos; Nikoletta K Pianou; Marinos G Metaxas; George M Spyrou; Constantinos D Anagnostopoulos Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: Carryn M Anderson; Tangel Chang; Michael M Graham; Michael D Marquardt; Anna Button; Brian J Smith; Yusuf Menda; Wenqing Sun; Nitin A Pagedar; John M Buatti Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-01-30 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jason M Williams; Sudheer D Rani; Xia Li; Lori R Arlinghaus; Tzu-Cheng Lee; Lawrence R MacDonald; Savannah C Partridge; Hakmook Kang; Jennifer G Whisenant; Richard G Abramson; Hannah M Linden; Paul E Kinahan; Thomas E Yankeelov Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: E Ronan Ryan; Constantinos T Sofocleous; Heiko Schöder; Jorge A Carrasquillo; Sadek Nehmeh; Steven M Larson; Raymond Thornton; Robert H Siegelbaum; Joseph P Erinjeri; Stephen B Solomon Journal: Radiology Date: 2013-04-05 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Brenda F Kurland; Mark Muzi; Lanell M Peterson; Robert K Doot; Kristen A Wangerin; David A Mankoff; Hannah M Linden; Paul E Kinahan Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-10-22 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Mika Naganawa; Jean-Dominique Gallezot; Vijay Shah; Tim Mulnix; Colin Young; Mark Dias; Ming-Kai Chen; Anne M Smith; Richard E Carson Journal: EJNMMI Phys Date: 2020-11-23
Authors: Jörg van den Hoff; Alexandr Lougovski; Georg Schramm; Jens Maus; Liane Oehme; Jan Petr; Bettina Beuthien-Baumann; Jörg Kotzerke; Frank Hofheinz Journal: EJNMMI Res Date: 2014-04-03 Impact factor: 3.138
Authors: Kristen A Wangerin; Mark Muzi; Lanell M Peterson; Hannah M Linden; Alena Novakova; Finbarr O'Sullivan; Brenda F Kurland; David A Mankoff; Paul E Kinahan Journal: Tomography Date: 2015-09