Literature DB >> 24604909

Determination of accuracy and precision of lesion uptake measurements in human subjects with time-of-flight PET.

Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon1, Suleman Surti, Amy E Perkins, Joel S Karp.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Inclusion of time-of-flight (TOF) information in PET reconstructions has been demonstrated to improve image quality through better signal-to-noise ratios, faster convergence, better lesion detectability, and better image uniformity. The goal of this work was to assess the impact of TOF information on the accuracy and precision of quantitative measurements of activity uptake in small lesions in clinical studies.
METHODS: Data from small (10-mm diameter) spheres were merged with list-mode data from 6 healthy volunteers after injection of (18)F-FDG. Six spheres having known activity uptake with respect to the average whole-body uptake were embedded in both the liver and the lung of the subject's data. Images were reconstructed with TOF information and without TOF information (non-TOF reconstruction). The measured uptake was compared with the known activity; variability was measured across 60 bootstrapped replicates of the merged data, across the 6 spheres within a given organ, and across all spheres in all subjects.
RESULTS: The average uptake across all spheres and subjects was approximately 50% higher in the lung and 20% higher in the liver with TOF reconstruction than with non-TOF reconstruction at comparable noise levels. The variabilities across replicates, across spheres within an organ, and across all spheres and subjects were 20%-30% lower with TOF reconstruction than with non-TOF reconstruction in the lung; in the liver, the variabilities were 10%-20% lower with TOF reconstruction than with non-TOF reconstruction.
CONCLUSION: TOF reconstruction leads to more accurate and precise measurements, both within a subject and across subjects, of the activity in small lesions under clinical conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PET; instrumentation; positron emission tomography; research methods; time-of-flight PET

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24604909      PMCID: PMC4128014          DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.113.127035

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nucl Med        ISSN: 0161-5505            Impact factor:   10.057


  29 in total

1.  A non-parametric bootstrap approach for analysing the statistical properties of SPECT and PET images.

Authors:  Irène Buvat
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2002-05-21       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Resampling estimates of precision in emission tomography.

Authors:  D R Haynor; S D Woods
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 10.048

3.  Radioactive spheres without inactive wall for lesion simulation in PET.

Authors:  Marisa Bazañez-Borgert; Ralph A Bundschuh; Michael Herz; Maria-Jose Martínez; Markus Schwaiger; Sibylle I Ziegler
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.820

Review 4.  Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution.

Authors:  Maurizio Conti
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2011-01-13       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 7. A technique to reduce noise in accidental coincidence measurements and coincidence efficiency calibration.

Authors:  M E Casey; E J Hoffman
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1986 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.826

6.  Time-of-flight positron emission tomography: status relative to conventional PET.

Authors:  T F Budinger
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1983-01       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Feasibility of time-of-flight reconstruction in positron emission tomography.

Authors:  N A Mullani; J Markham; M M Ter-Pogossian
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1980-11       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Physical performance of the new hybrid PET∕CT Discovery-690.

Authors:  V Bettinardi; L Presotto; E Rapisarda; M Picchio; L Gianolli; M C Gilardi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  An assessment of the impact of incorporating time-of-flight information into clinical PET/CT imaging.

Authors:  Cristina Lois; Bjoern W Jakoby; Misty J Long; Karl F Hubner; David W Barker; Michael E Casey; Maurizio Conti; Vladimir Y Panin; Dan J Kadrmas; David W Townsend
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  The imaging performance of a LaBr3-based PET scanner.

Authors:  M E Daube-Witherspoon; S Surti; A Perkins; C C M Kyba; R Wiener; M E Werner; R Kulp; J S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 3.609

View more
  22 in total

Review 1.  Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: A technical perspective.

Authors:  Jonathan B Moody; Benjamin C Lee; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Venkatesh L Murthy
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 5.952

2.  Highly multiplexed signal readout for a time-of-flight positron emission tomography detector based on silicon photomultipliers.

Authors:  Joshua W Cates; Matthew F Bieniosek; Craig S Levin
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-03-23

3.  Clinical evaluation of TOF versus non-TOF on PET artifacts in simultaneous PET/MR: a dual centre experience.

Authors:  Edwin E G W Ter Voert; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Sangtae Ahn; Florian Wiesinger; M Mehdi Khalighi; Craig S Levin; Andrei H Iagaru; Greg Zaharchuk; Martin Huellner; Gaspar Delso
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  The Effect of Defective PET Detectors in Clinical Simultaneous [18F]FDG Time-of-Flight PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  Edwin E G W Ter Voert; Gaspar Delso; Felipe de Galiza Barbosa; Martin Huellner; Patrick Veit-Haibach
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  Suboptimal Sensitivity and Specificity of PET and Other Gross Imaging Techniques in Assessing Lymph Node Metastasis.

Authors:  Abass Alavi; Sean D Carlin; Thomas J Werner; Abdullah Al-Zaghal
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  Lesion detection and quantification performance of the Tachyon-I time-of-flight PET scanner: phantom and human studies.

Authors:  Xuezhu Zhang; Qiyu Peng; Jian Zhou; Jennifer S Huber; William W Moses; Jinyi Qi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-03-16       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 7.  Update on time-of-flight PET imaging.

Authors:  Suleman Surti
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Validation of phantom-based harmonization for patient harmonization.

Authors:  Joseph V Panetta; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-06-09       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  The effect of time-of-flight and point spread function modeling on 82Rb myocardial perfusion imaging of obese patients.

Authors:  Paul K R Dasari; Judson P Jones; Michael E Casey; Yuanyuan Liang; Vasken Dilsizian; Mark F Smith
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 10.  Advances in time-of-flight PET.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 2.685

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.