UNLABELLED: Ultrashort-echo-time (UTE) sequences have been proposed in the past for MR-based attenuation correction of PET data, because of their ability to image cortical bone. In the present work we assessed the limitations of dual-echo UTE imaging for bone segmentation in head and neck imaging. Sequentially acquired MR and PET/CT clinical data were used for this purpose. METHODS: Twenty patients referred for a clinical oncology examination were scanned using a trimodality setup. Among the MR sequences, a dual-echo UTE acquisition of the head was acquired and used to create tissue R2 maps. The different undesired structures present in these maps were identified by an experienced radiologist. Global and local measurements of the overlap between R2-based and CT-based bone masks were computed. RESULTS: UTE R2 maps displayed a nonfunctional relation with CT data. The obtained bone masks showed acceptable overlap with the corresponding CT data, in the case of the skull itself (e.g., 47% mismatch for the parietal region), with decreased performance in the base of the skull and in the neck (e.g., 78% for the maxillary region). Unwanted structures were detected, both anatomic (e.g., sternocleidomastoid, temporal, and masseter muscles) and artifactual (e.g., dental implants and air-tissue interfaces). CONCLUSION: It is indeed possible to estimate the anatomic location of bone tissue using UTE sequences. However, using pure parametric maps for attenuation correction may lead to bias close to certain anatomic structures and areas of high magnetic field inhomogeneity. More sophisticated approaches are necessary to compensate for these effects.
UNLABELLED: Ultrashort-echo-time (UTE) sequences have been proposed in the past for MR-based attenuation correction of PET data, because of their ability to image cortical bone. In the present work we assessed the limitations of dual-echo UTE imaging for bone segmentation in head and neck imaging. Sequentially acquired MR and PET/CT clinical data were used for this purpose. METHODS: Twenty patients referred for a clinical oncology examination were scanned using a trimodality setup. Among the MR sequences, a dual-echo UTE acquisition of the head was acquired and used to create tissue R2 maps. The different undesired structures present in these maps were identified by an experienced radiologist. Global and local measurements of the overlap between R2-based and CT-based bone masks were computed. RESULTS: UTE R2 maps displayed a nonfunctional relation with CT data. The obtained bone masks showed acceptable overlap with the corresponding CT data, in the case of the skull itself (e.g., 47% mismatch for the parietal region), with decreased performance in the base of the skull and in the neck (e.g., 78% for the maxillary region). Unwanted structures were detected, both anatomic (e.g., sternocleidomastoid, temporal, and masseter muscles) and artifactual (e.g., dental implants and air-tissue interfaces). CONCLUSION: It is indeed possible to estimate the anatomic location of bone tissue using UTE sequences. However, using pure parametric maps for attenuation correction may lead to bias close to certain anatomic structures and areas of high magnetic field inhomogeneity. More sophisticated approaches are necessary to compensate for these effects.
Authors: D L Bailey; B J Pichler; B Gückel; H Barthel; A J Beer; J Bremerich; J Czernin; A Drzezga; C Franzius; V Goh; M Hartenbach; H Iida; A Kjaer; C la Fougère; C N Ladefoged; I Law; K Nikolaou; H H Quick; O Sabri; J Schäfer; M Schäfers; H F Wehrl; T Beyer Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Jorge D Oldan; Shetal N Shah; Richard C Brunken; Frank P DiFilippo; Nancy A Obuchowski; Michael A Bolen Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-06-13 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Claes N Ladefoged; Flemming L Andersen; Sune H Keller; Thomas Beyer; Ian Law; Liselotte Højgaard; Sune Darkner; Francois Lauze Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2015-06-09
Authors: Salil Soman; Jose A Bregni; Berkin Bilgic; Ursula Nemec; Audrey Fan; Zhe Liu; Robert L Barry; Jiang Du; Keith Main; Jerome Yesavage; Maheen M Adamson; Michael Moseley; Yi Wang Journal: Curr Radiol Rep Date: 2017-02-14
Authors: Yasheng Chen; Meher Juttukonda; Yi Su; Tammie Benzinger; Brian G Rubin; Yueh Z Lee; Weili Lin; Dinggang Shen; David Lalush; Hongyu An Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-12-17 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jorge Cabello; Mathias Lukas; Elena Rota Kops; André Ribeiro; N Jon Shah; Igor Yakushev; Thomas Pyka; Stephan G Nekolla; Sibylle I Ziegler Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-04-20 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Thomas Koesters; Kent P Friedman; Matthias Fenchel; Yiqiang Zhan; Gerardo Hermosillo; James Babb; Ileana O Jelescu; David Faul; Fernando E Boada; Timothy M Shepherd Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2016-02-02 Impact factor: 10.057