Literature DB >> 18670051

Impact of metal artefacts due to EEG electrodes in brain PET/CT imaging.

Catherine Lemmens1, Marie-Louise Montandon, Johan Nuyts, Osman Ratib, Patrick Dupont, Habib Zaidi.   

Abstract

The goal of this study is to investigate the impact of electroencephalogram (EEG) electrodes on the visual quality and quantification of (18)F-FDG PET images in neurological PET/CT examinations. For this purpose, the scans of 20 epilepsy patients with EEG monitoring were used. The CT data were reconstructed with filtered backprojection (FBP) and with a metal artefact reduction (MAR) algorithm. Both data sets were used for CT-based attenuation correction (AC) of the PET data. Also, a calculated AC (CALC) technique was considered. A volume of interest (VOI)-based analysis and a voxel-based quantitative analysis were performed to compare the different AC methods. Images were also evaluated visually by two observers. It was shown with simulations and phantom measurements that from the considered AC methods, the MAR-AC can be used as the reference in this setting. The visual assessment of PET images showed local hot spots outside the brain corresponding to the locations of the electrodes when using FBP-AC. In the brain, no abnormalities were observed. The quantitative analysis showed a very good correlation between PET-FBP-AC and PET-MAR-AC, with a statistically significant positive bias in the PET-FBP-AC images of about 5-7% in most brain voxels. There was also good correlation between PET-CALC-AC and PET-MAR-AC, but in the PET-CALC-AC images, regions with both a significant positive and negative bias were observed. EEG electrodes give rise to local hot spots outside the brain and a positive quantification bias in the brain. However, when diagnosis is made by mere visual assessment, the presence of EEG electrodes does not seem to alter the diagnosis. When quantification is performed, the bias becomes an issue especially when comparing brain images with and without EEG monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18670051     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/53/16/013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  7 in total

1.  Comparative assessment of energy-mapping approaches in CT-based attenuation correction for PET.

Authors:  Mohammad R Ay; Maryam Shirmohammad; Saeed Sarkar; Arman Rahmim; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.488

2.  Is metal artefact reduction mandatory in cardiac PET/CT imaging in the presence of pacemaker and implantable cardioverter defibrillator leads?

Authors:  Pardis Ghafarian; S M R Aghamiri; Mohammad R Ay; Arman Rahmim; Thomas H Schindler; Osman Ratib; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-10-20       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Qualitative and quantitative assessment of metal artifacts arising from implantable cardiac pacing devices in oncological PET/CT studies: a phantom study.

Authors:  Mohammad R Ay; Abolfazl Mehranian; Mehrsima Abdoli; Pardis Ghafarian; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.488

4.  Effects of MR surface coils on PET quantification.

Authors:  Lawrence R MacDonald; Steve Kohlmyer; Chi Liu; Thomas K Lewellen; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Reduction of artefacts caused by hip implants in CT-based attenuation-corrected PET images using 2-D interpolation of a virtual sinogram on an irregular grid.

Authors:  Mehrsima Abdoli; Johan R de Jong; Jan Pruim; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Habib Zaidi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Quantitative comparison of commercial and non-commercial metal artifact reduction techniques in computed tomography.

Authors:  Dirk Wagenaar; Emiel R van der Graaf; Arjen van der Schaaf; Marcel J W Greuter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Simultaneous trimodal PET-MR-EEG imaging: Do EEG caps generate artefacts in PET images?

Authors:  Ravichandran Rajkumar; Elena Rota Kops; Jörg Mauler; Lutz Tellmann; Christoph Lerche; Hans Herzog; N Jon Shah; Irene Neuner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.