Literature DB >> 16632745

Truncation artifact on PET/CT: impact on measurements of activity concentration and assessment of a correction algorithm.

Osama Mawlawi1, Jeremy J Erasmus, Tinsu Pan, Dianna D Cody, Rachelle Campbell, Albert H Lonn, Steve Kohlmyer, Homer A Macapinlac, Donald A Podoloff.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Discrepancy between fields of view (FOVs) in a PET/CT scanner causes a truncation artifact when imaging extends beyond the CT FOV. The purposes of this study were to evaluate the impact of this artifact on measurements of 18F-FDG activity concentrations and to assess a truncation correction algorithm.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two phantoms and five patients were used in this study. In the first phantom, three inserts (water, air, bone equivalent) were placed in a water-filled cylinder containing 18F-FDG. In the second phantom study, a chest phantom and a 2-L bottle fitted with a bone insert were used to simulate a patient's torso and arm. Both phantoms were imaged while positioned centrally (baseline) and at the edge of the CT FOV to induce truncation. PET images were reconstructed using attenuation maps from truncated and truncation-corrected CT images. Regions of interest (ROIs) drawn on the inserts, simulated arm, and background water of the baseline truncated and truncation-corrected PET images were compared. In addition, extremity malignancies of five patients truncated on CT images were reconstructed with and without correction and the maximum standard uptake values (SUVs) of the malignancies were compared.
RESULTS: Truncation artifact manifests as a rim of high activity concentration at the edge of the truncated CT image with an adjacent low-concentration region peripherally. The correction algorithm minimizes these effects. Phantom studies showed a maximum variation of -5.4% in the truncation-corrected background water image compared with the baseline image. Activity concentration in the water insert was 6.3% higher while that of air and bone inserts was similar to baseline. Extremity malignancies showed a consistent increase in the maximum SUV after truncation correction.
CONCLUSION: Truncation affects measurements of 18F-FDG activity concentrations in PET/CT. A truncation-correction algorithm corrects truncation artifacts with small residual error.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16632745     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.05.0255

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  12 in total

Review 1.  Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques.

Authors:  Matthias Hofmann; Bernd Pichler; Bernhard Schölkopf; Thomas Beyer
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Scatter Reduction and Correction for Dual-Source Cone-Beam CT Using Prepatient Grids.

Authors:  Lei Ren; Yingxuan Chen; You Zhang; William Giles; Jianyue Jin; Fang-Fang Yin
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-05-24

Review 3.  Sequential whole-body PET/MR scanner: concept, clinical use, and optimisation after two years in the clinic. The manufacturer's perspective.

Authors:  Antonis Kalemis; Bénédicte M A Delattre; Susanne Heinzer
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2012-08-07       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 4.  Challenges and current methods for attenuation correction in PET/MR.

Authors:  Vincent Keereman; Pieter Mollet; Yannick Berker; Volkmar Schulz; Stefaan Vandenberghe
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2012-08-09       Impact factor: 2.310

Review 5.  Accuracy and precision of radioactivity quantification in nuclear medicine images.

Authors:  Eric C Frey; John L Humm; Michael Ljungberg
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 4.446

6.  Effect of patient arm motion in whole-body PET/CT.

Authors:  Martin A Lodge; Joyce C Mhlanga; Steve Y Cho; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 7.  Morphology supporting function: attenuation correction for SPECT/CT, PET/CT, and PET/MR imaging.

Authors:  Tzu C Lee; Adam M Alessio; Robert M Miyaoka; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 2.346

Review 8.  Pitfalls on PET/CT Due to Artifacts and Instrumentation.

Authors:  Yu-Jung Tsai; Chi Liu
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 4.446

9.  The reduction of artifacts due to metal hip implants in CT-attenuation corrected PET images from hybrid PET/CT scanners.

Authors:  John A Kennedy; Ora Israel; Alex Frenkel; Rachel Bar-Shalom; Haim Azhari
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2007-05-23       Impact factor: 3.079

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.