Literature DB >> 16513616

Optimized contrast-enhanced CT protocols for diagnostic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT: technical aspects of single-phase versus multiphase CT imaging.

Klaus Brechtel1, Magnus Klein, Monika Vogel, Marc Mueller, Philip Aschoff, Thomas Beyer, Susanna M Eschmann, Roland Bares, Claus D Claussen, Anna C Pfannenberg.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The purpose of this study was to compare various PET/CT examination protocols that use contrast-enhanced single-phase or contrast-enhanced multiphase CT scans under different breathing conditions.
METHODS: Sixty patients with different malignant tumors were randomized into 4 different PET/CT protocols. Single-phase protocols included an intravenous contrast-enhanced (Ultravist 370; iodine at 370 mg/mL) single-phase whole-body CT scan (90 mL at 1.8 mL/min; delay, 90 s) during shallow breathing (protocol A) or during normal expiration (NormExp; protocol B). Multiphase protocols included 2 separate CT scans in the arterial contrast enhancement phase (90 mL at 2.5-2.8 mL/min; bolus tracking; scan range, base of the skull to the kidneys) and the portal-venous contrast enhancement phase (delay, 90 s; scan range, base of the lungs to the proximal thighs) during shallow breathing (protocol C) or during NormExp (protocol D) followed by a low-dose CT scan during shallow breathing for attenuation correction and whole-body PET. Feasibility was assessed by comparing the misalignment of the upper abdominal organs quantitatively by means of the craniocaudal, lateral, and anterior-posterior differences on coregistered PET/CT images. For image quality, the occurrence of CT artifacts and mismatching of rigid body points were evaluated qualitatively.
RESULTS: Misalignment was significantly lower for protocol B in almost all organs and represented the best coregistration quality. Surprisingly, protocol A showed significantly better alignment than the multiphase CT scans during NormExp. Misalignment values between the multiphase protocols were not significantly different, with a trend toward lower values for protocol D. The best CT image quality, with a significantly lower occurrence of artifacts, was found for protocols B and D (NormExp). The levels of mismatching of rigid body points because of patient movement in between the transmission and emission scans were similar for all protocols.
CONCLUSION: Multiphase CT protocols presented a technical disadvantage represented by suboptimal image coregistration compared with single-phase protocols. Nevertheless, multiphase protocols are technically feasible and should be considered for patients who will benefit from a contrast-enhanced multiphase CT examination for diagnosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16513616

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  12 in total

1.  Multiphase contrast-enhanced CT with highly concentrated contrast agent can be used for PET attenuation correction in integrated PET/CT imaging.

Authors:  Philip Aschoff; Christian Plathow; Thomas Beyer; Matthias P Lichy; Gunter Erb; Mehmet Ö Öksüz; Claus D Claussen; Christina Pfannenberg
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-11-29       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Putting 'clear' into nuclear medicine: a decade of PET/CT development.

Authors:  Thomas Beyer; David W Townsend
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 3.  Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging: the next generation of multimodality imaging?

Authors:  Bernd J Pichler; Hans F Wehrl; Armin Kolb; Martin S Judenhofer
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.446

4.  Low dose non-enhanced CT versus standard dose contrast-enhanced CT in combined PET/CT protocols for staging and therapy planning in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Anna C Pfannenberg; Philip Aschoff; Klaus Brechtel; Mark Müller; Roland Bares; Frank Paulsen; Jutta Scheiderbauer; Godehard Friedel; Claus D Claussen; Susanne M Eschmann
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-08-01       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Clinical role of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in post-operative follow up of gastric cancer: initial results.

Authors:  Long Sun; Xin-Hui Su; Yong-Song Guan; Wei-Ming Pan; Zuo-Ming Luo; Ji-Hong Wei; Hua Wu
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-08-07       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Quality assurance of positron emission tomography/computed tomography for radiation therapy.

Authors:  Lei Xing
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 7.038

7.  Does chemotherapy influence the quantification of SUV when contrast-enhanced CT is used in PET/CT in lymphoma?

Authors:  Pierre Vera; Matthieu John Ouvrier; Sébastien Hapdey; Marc Thillays; Anne Sophie Pesquet; Brigitte Diologent; Françoise Callonec; Anne Hitzel; Agathe Edet-Sanson; Jean François Ménard; Fabrice Jardin; Hervé Tilly
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-08-11       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 8.  What scans we will read: imaging instrumentation trends in clinical oncology.

Authors:  Thomas Beyer; Luc Bidaut; John Dickson; Marc Kachelriess; Fabian Kiessling; Rainer Leitgeb; Jingfei Ma; Lalith Kumar Shiyam Sundar; Benjamin Theek; Osama Mawlawi
Journal:  Cancer Imaging       Date:  2020-06-09       Impact factor: 3.909

9.  Is radionuclide transmission scanning obsolete for dual-modality PET/CT systems?

Authors:  Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Optimisation of whole-body PET/CT scanning protocols.

Authors:  H Zaidi
Journal:  Biomed Imaging Interv J       Date:  2007-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.