PURPOSE: Co-registration accuracy in combined whole-body (WB) PET/CT imaging is impaired by respiration-induced mismatches between the CT and the PET. Furthermore, PET/CT misregistration may bias the PET tracer distribution following CT-based attenuation correction (CT-AC). With the introduction of multi-row CT technology of up to 16 detector rows into PET/CT designs, we investigated the incidence of respiration artifacts in WB PET/CT examinations of patients who were unable to follow any breath-hold instructions. METHODS: A total of 80 WB studies from six international sites operating PET/CT tomographs with 1-, 2-, 4-, 6-, 8-, and 16-row spiral CT were included. PET/CT examinations were acquired with the patients breathing normally during both the CT and the PET scan, and CT-AC was performed routinely. All studies were anonymized and reviewed independently by three radiologists and three nuclear medicine specialists. We report the frequency and severity of artifacts on CT and PET for the thorax and the abdomen. RESULTS: In WB PET/CT imaging of normally breathing patients, significant gains in diagnostic image quality can be expected from employing CT technology with six or more detector rows. In our study, fewer PET images appear distorted than corresponding CT images, which is due to the limited propagation of only mild CT image artifacts after the resampling of the CT-based attenuation map during CT-AC. CONCLUSION: In whole-body PET/CT imaging of normally breathing patients, respiration-induced artifacts are reduced in both magnitude and prominence for PET/CT systems employing CT components of six or more detector rows.
PURPOSE: Co-registration accuracy in combined whole-body (WB) PET/CT imaging is impaired by respiration-induced mismatches between the CT and the PET. Furthermore, PET/CT misregistration may bias the PET tracer distribution following CT-based attenuation correction (CT-AC). With the introduction of multi-row CT technology of up to 16 detector rows into PET/CT designs, we investigated the incidence of respiration artifacts in WB PET/CT examinations of patients who were unable to follow any breath-hold instructions. METHODS: A total of 80 WB studies from six international sites operating PET/CT tomographs with 1-, 2-, 4-, 6-, 8-, and 16-row spiral CT were included. PET/CT examinations were acquired with the patients breathing normally during both the CT and the PET scan, and CT-AC was performed routinely. All studies were anonymized and reviewed independently by three radiologists and three nuclear medicine specialists. We report the frequency and severity of artifacts on CT and PET for the thorax and the abdomen. RESULTS: In WB PET/CT imaging of normally breathing patients, significant gains in diagnostic image quality can be expected from employing CT technology with six or more detector rows. In our study, fewer PET images appear distorted than corresponding CT images, which is due to the limited propagation of only mild CT image artifacts after the resampling of the CT-based attenuation map during CT-AC. CONCLUSION: In whole-body PET/CT imaging of normally breathing patients, respiration-induced artifacts are reduced in both magnitude and prominence for PET/CT systems employing CT components of six or more detector rows.
Authors: Gerald Antoch; Lutz S Freudenberg; Joerg Stattaus; Walter Jentzen; Stefan P Mueller; Joerg F Debatin; Andreas Bockisch Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Medhat M Osman; Christian Cohade; Yuji Nakamoto; Laura T Marshall; Jeff P Leal; Richard L Wahl Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Gerhard W Goerres; Cyrill Burger; Michael R Schwitter; Thai-Nia H Heidelberg; Burkhardt Seifert; Gustav K von Schulthess Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2002-06-22 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: C Burger; G Goerres; S Schoenes; A Buck; A H R Lonn; G K Von Schulthess Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2002-04-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Wolfgang Römer; Margaret Chung; Andrew Chan; David W Townsend; Frank Torok; Barry McCook; Michael P Federle; Norbert Avril Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Ruoqiao Zhang; Dženan Zukić; Darrin W Byrd; Andinet Enquobahrie; Adam M Alessio; Kevin Cleary; Filip Banovac; Paul E Kinahan Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: Elena Tonkopi; Pai-Chun Melinda Chi; Osama Mawlawi; Adam C Riegel; Eric M Rohren; Homer A Macapinlac; Tinsu Pan Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2010-02-04 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Jayson Wang; Gary Cook; John Frank; Roberto Dina; Naomi Livni; John Lynn; William Fleming; Michael J Seckl Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2007-08-03 Impact factor: 4.430