Literature DB >> 23297330

Liver SULmean at FDG PET/CT: interreader agreement and impact of placement of volume of interest.

Maya Viner1, Gustavo Mercier, Frank Hao, Ashish Malladi, Rathan M Subramaniam.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate how interreader agreement and the site of the volume of interest (VOI) affect the agreement and variability of liver mean standardized uptake value normalized to lean body mass (SUL(mean)) at fluorine 18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant retrospective review of PET/CT images and patient records. PET/CT images were reviewed in 116 randomly selected patients who had undergone a baseline PET/CT examination and who had normal livers according to imaging and biochemical test results. A 30-mm-diameter spherical VOI was placed within the right lobe of the liver above, below, and at the level of the main portal vein. Two readers performed all measurements independently. Analysis of variance, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis, and Bland-Altman analysis were performed.
RESULTS: The mean SUL(mean) was between 2.11 and 2.17 at the upper, portal, and lower levels of the right lobe of the liver. The coefficient of variance was between 21.0% and 23.1%, without significant differences for location, with the least variance in the upper level. The ICC of the two readers varied between 0.98 and 0.99 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97, 0.99; P = .0001) at each level. The greatest precision (narrowest CI) was also in the upper level. Bias was 0.025 ± 0.10 (standard deviation) at the upper level, was 0.004 ± 0.14 at the lower level, and was 0.047 ± 0.10 at the portal vein (P = .02). For each reader, there was almost perfect reliability between the SUL(mean) measurements made at the three levels, with an ICC of 0.98 (95% CI: 0.98, 0.99; P = .0001).
CONCLUSION: Liver SUL(mean) at FDG PET/CT has excellent interreader agreement, with similar values and variance whether measured at the upper, lower, or portal vein levels within the right lobe of the liver. © RSNA, 2013.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23297330     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12121385

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  15 in total

1.  Semiquantitative Parameters in PSMA-Targeted PET Imaging with 18F-DCFPyL: Variability in Normal-Organ Uptake.

Authors:  Xin Li; Steven P Rowe; Jeffrey P Leal; Michael A Gorin; Mohamad E Allaf; Ashley E Ross; Kenneth J Pienta; Martin A Lodge; Martin G Pomper
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Quantitation of Cancer Treatment Response by 18F-FDG PET/CT: Multicenter Assessment of Measurement Variability.

Authors:  Joo Hyun O; Heather Jacene; Brandon Luber; Hao Wang; Minh-Huy Huynh; Jeffrey P Leal; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-03-30       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Analysis of metal artifact reduction tools for dental hardware in CT scans of the oral cavity: kVp, iterative reconstruction, dual-energy CT, metal artifact reduction software: does it make a difference?

Authors:  An De Crop; Jan Casselman; Tom Van Hoof; Melissa Dierens; Elke Vereecke; Nicolas Bossu; Jaime Pamplona; Katharina D'Herde; Hubert Thierens; Klaus Bacher
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Low-calorie sweeteners augment tissue-specific insulin sensitivity in a large animal model of obesity.

Authors:  Charles-Henri Malbert; Michael Horowitz; Richard L Young
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Two-time-point FDG PET/CT: liver SULmean repeatability.

Authors:  Abdel K Tahari; Vasavi Paidpally; Alin Chirindel; Richard L Wahl; Rathan M Subramaniam
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Liver standardized uptake value corrected for lean body mass at FDG PET/CT: effect of FDG uptake time.

Authors:  Alin Chirindel; Krishna C Alluri; Abdel K Tahari; Muhammad Chaudhry; Richard L Wahl; Martin A Lodge; Rathan M Subramaniam
Journal:  Clin Nucl Med       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 7.794

7.  Test-Retest Reproducibility of 18F-FDG PET/CT Uptake in Cancer Patients Within a Qualified and Calibrated Local Network.

Authors:  Brenda F Kurland; Lanell M Peterson; Andrew T Shields; Jean H Lee; Darrin W Byrd; Alena Novakova-Jiresova; Mark Muzi; Jennifer M Specht; David A Mankoff; Hannah M Linden; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Correlation of clinical and physical-technical image quality in chest CT: a human cadaver study applied on iterative reconstruction.

Authors:  An De Crop; Peter Smeets; Tom Van Hoof; Merel Vergauwen; Tom Dewaele; Mathias Van Borsel; Eric Achten; Koenraad Verstraete; Katharina D'Herde; Hubert Thierens; Klaus Bacher
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 1.930

9.  A semi-automated technique determining the liver standardized uptake value reference for tumor delineation in FDG PET-CT.

Authors:  Kenji Hirata; Kentaro Kobayashi; Koon-Pong Wong; Osamu Manabe; Andrew Surmak; Nagara Tamaki; Sung-Cheng Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  For avid glucose tumors, the SUV peak is the most reliable parameter for [(18)F]FDG-PET/CT quantification, regardless of acquisition time.

Authors:  Avigaëlle Sher; Franck Lacoeuille; Pacôme Fosse; Laurent Vervueren; Aurélie Cahouet-Vannier; Djamel Dabli; Francis Bouchet; Olivier Couturier
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2016-03-05       Impact factor: 3.138

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.