UNLABELLED: Head movement presents a continuing problem in PET studies. Head restraint minimizes movement but is unreliable, resulting in the need to develop alternative strategies. These include frame-by-frame (FBF) realignment or use of motion tracking (MT) during the scan to realign PET acquisition data. Here we present a comparative analysis of these 2 methods of motion correction. METHODS: Eight volunteers were examined at rest using (11)C-raclopride PET with the radioligand administered as a bolus followed by constant infusion to achieve steady state. Binding potential (BP) was estimated using the ratio method during 2 periods of the scan at steady state. Head movement was compensated by using coregistration between frames (FBF) and 3 methods using MT measurements of head position acquired with a commercially available optical tracking system. RESULTS: All methods of realignment improved test-retest reliability and noise characteristics of the raw data, with important consequences for the power to detect small changes in radiotracer binding, and the potential to reduce false-positive and false-negative results. MT methods were superior to FBF realignment using coregistration on some indices. CONCLUSION: Such methods have considerable potential to improve the reliability of PET data with important implications for the numbers of volunteers required to test hypotheses.
UNLABELLED: Head movement presents a continuing problem in PET studies. Head restraint minimizes movement but is unreliable, resulting in the need to develop alternative strategies. These include frame-by-frame (FBF) realignment or use of motion tracking (MT) during the scan to realign PET acquisition data. Here we present a comparative analysis of these 2 methods of motion correction. METHODS: Eight volunteers were examined at rest using (11)C-raclopride PET with the radioligand administered as a bolus followed by constant infusion to achieve steady state. Binding potential (BP) was estimated using the ratio method during 2 periods of the scan at steady state. Head movement was compensated by using coregistration between frames (FBF) and 3 methods using MT measurements of head position acquired with a commercially available optical tracking system. RESULTS: All methods of realignment improved test-retest reliability and noise characteristics of the raw data, with important consequences for the power to detect small changes in radiotracer binding, and the potential to reduce false-positive and false-negative results. MT methods were superior to FBF realignment using coregistration on some indices. CONCLUSION: Such methods have considerable potential to improve the reliability of PET data with important implications for the numbers of volunteers required to test hypotheses.
Authors: Peter S Bloomfield; Sudhakar Selvaraj; Vincenzo de Paola; Oliver D Howes; Mattia Veronese; Gaia Rizzo; Alessandra Bertoldo; David R Owen; Michael Ap Bloomfield; Ilaria Bonoldi; Nicola Kalk; Federico Turkheimer; Philip McGuire Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2015-10-16 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Hannu Huhdanpaa; Darryl H Hwang; Gregory G Gasparian; Michael T Booker; Yong Cen; Alexander Lerner; Orest B Boyko; John L Go; Paul E Kim; Anandh Rajamohan; Meng Law; Mark S Shiroishi Journal: J Digit Imaging Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.056
Authors: Michael A King; Joyoni Dey; Karen Johnson; Paul Dasari; Joyeeta M Mukherjee; Joseph E McNamara; Arda Konik; Cliff Lindsay; Shaokuan Zheng; Dennis Coughlin Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-11 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: F Fahmi; A Riordan; L F M Beenen; G J Streekstra; N Y Janssen; H W de Jong; C B L Majoie; E van Bavel; H A Marquering Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2013-10-30 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Se Young Chun; Timothy G Reese; Jinsong Ouyang; Bastien Guerin; Ciprian Catana; Xuping Zhu; Nathaniel M Alpert; Georges El Fakhri Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 10.057