Literature DB >> 21386733

Validation of new image-derived arterial input functions at the aorta using 18F-fluoride positron emission tomography.

Tanuj Puri1, Glen M Blake, Musib Siddique, Michelle L Frost, Gary J R Cook, Paul K Marsden, Ignac Fogelman, Kathleen M Curran.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: (i) To validate two new image-based methods for finding the plasma arterial input function (AIF) and evaluate the performance of these and two similar techniques against arterial sampling. (ii) To evaluate the performance of all four image-derived AIF (IDAIF) methods against arterial sampling for measuring the F plasma clearance (Ki) to the lumbar spine.
METHODS: Eight healthy postmenopausal women had a F-fluoride positron emission tomography scan of the lumbar spine. Venous blood samples were used to estimate the IDAIFs from: (i) a fixed population-based partial volume correction (PVC) factor method, (ii) a variable PVC factor method, (iii) the Chen method, and (iv) the Cook-Lodge method. Continuous arterial sampling and the respective Ki values were used as the gold standard against which the performance of the IDAIF methods was compared.
RESULTS: The IDAIFs were compared with direct arterial sampling in terms of the area under the curve values. The percentage root mean square error in area under the curves compared with arterial sampling were: (i) fixed PVC: 12.7%, (ii) variable PVC: 12.0%, (iii) Chen: 39.0%, and (iv) Cook-Lodge: 17.3%. There were small but significant differences in the Ki values found by all four methods compared with arterial sampling. Bland-Altman plots of Ki values showed the best agreement for the variable and fixed PVC methods with a standard deviation of 0.0026 and 0.0030 ml/min/ml, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The differences in the Ki values obtained at the lumbar spine using direct arterial sampling and any of the IDAIF methods at the aorta were clinically nonsignificant. The variable PVC and fixed PVC methods performed better than the Cook-Lodge and Chen methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21386733     DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283452918

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nucl Med Commun        ISSN: 0143-3636            Impact factor:   1.690


  8 in total

1.  Differences in regional bone metabolism at the spine and hip: a quantitative study using (18)F-fluoride positron emission tomography.

Authors:  T Puri; M L Frost; K M Curran; M Siddique; A E B Moore; G J R Cook; P K Marsden; I Fogelman; G M Blake
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-05-12       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 2.  Imaging of site specific bone turnover in osteoporosis using positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Glen M Blake; Musib Siddique; Michelle L Frost; Amelia E B Moore; Ignac Fogelman
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 5.096

Review 3.  Site specific measurements of bone formation using [18F] sodium fluoride PET/CT.

Authors:  Glen M Blake; Tanuj Puri; Musib Siddique; Michelle L Frost; Amelia E B Moore; Ignac Fogelman
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2018-02

4.  Methodological considerations in quantification of 3'-deoxy-3'-[18F]fluorothymidine uptake measured with positron emission tomography in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Virginie Frings; Adrianus J de Langen; Maqsood Yaqub; Robert C Schuit; Astrid A M van der Veldt; Otto S Hoekstra; Egbert F Smit; Ronald Boellaard
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  [18F]Fluoromisonidazole PET in rectal cancer.

Authors:  Tanuj Puri; Tessa A Greenhalgh; James M Wilson; Jamie Franklin; Lia Mun Wang; Victoria Strauss; Chris Cunningham; Mike Partridge; Tim Maughan
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 3.138

6.  Evaluation of a short dynamic 18F-fluoride PET/CT scanning method to assess bone metabolic activity in spinal orthopedics.

Authors:  Marloes J M Peters; Roel Wierts; Elisabeth M C Jutten; Servé G E A Halders; Paul C P H Willems; Boudewijn Brans
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.668

7.  Is Response Assessment of Breast Cancer Bone Metastases Better with Measurement of 18F-Fluoride Metabolic Flux Than with Measurement of 18F-Fluoride PET/CT SUV?

Authors:  Gurdip K Azad; Musib Siddique; Benjamin Taylor; Adrian Green; Jim O'Doherty; Joanna Gariani; Glen M Blake; Janine Mansi; Vicky Goh; Gary J R Cook
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 8.  [18F] Sodium Fluoride PET Kinetic Parameters in Bone Imaging.

Authors:  Tanuj Puri; Michelle L Frost; Gary J Cook; Glen M Blake
Journal:  Tomography       Date:  2021-12-01
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.