Literature DB >> 24877983

Simultaneous whole-body PET/MR imaging in comparison to PET/CT in pediatric oncology: initial results.

Jürgen F Schäfer1, Sergios Gatidis, Holger Schmidt, Brigitte Gückel, Ilja Bezrukov, Christina A Pfannenberg, Matthias Reimold, Martin Ebinger, Jörg Fuchs, Claus D Claussen, Nina F Schwenzer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and PET/computed tomography (CT) for lesion detection and interpretation, quantification of fluorine 18 ((18)F) fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake, and accuracy of MR-based PET attenuation correction in pediatric patients with solid tumors. Materials and Methods This prospective study had local ethics committee and German Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices approval. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients and legal guardians. Twenty whole-body (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR examinations were performed in 18 pediatric patients (median age, 14 years; range, 11-17 years). (18)F-FDG PET/CT and (18)F-FDG PET/MR data were acquired sequentially on the same day for all patients. PET standardized uptake values (SUVs) were quantified with volume of interest measurements in lesions and healthy tissues. MR-based PET attenuation correction was compared with CT-derived attenuation maps (µ-maps). Lesion detection was assessed with separate reading of PET/CT and PET/MR data. Estimates of radiation dose were derived from the applied doses of (18)F-FDG and CT protocol parameters. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to report correlation coefficients and relative deviations for comparison of SUVs, rates of lesion detection, and percentage reductions in radiation dose.
RESULTS: PET SUVs showed strong correlations between PET of PET/CT (PETCT) and PET of PET/MR (PETMR) (r > 0.85 for most tissues). Apart from drawbacks of MR-based PET attenuation correction in osseous structures and lungs, similar SUVs were found on PET images corrected with CT-based µ-maps (13.1% deviation of SUVs for bone marrow and <5% deviation for other tissues). Lesion detection rate with PET/MR imaging was equivalent to that with PET/CT (61 areas of focal uptake on PETMR images vs 62 areas on PETCT images). Advantages of PET/MR were observed especially in soft-tissue regions. Furthermore, PET/MR offered significant dose reduction (73%) compared with PET/CT.
CONCLUSION: Pediatric oncologic PET/MR is technically feasible, showing satisfactory performance for PET quantification with SUVs similar to those of PET/CT. Compared with PET/CT, PET/MR demonstrates equivalent lesion detection rates while offering markedly reduced radiation exposure. Thus, PET/MR is a promising modality for the clinical work-up of pediatric malignancies. Online supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2014.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24877983     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14131732

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


  64 in total

1.  [MRI/PET for the detection of bone metastases. The new gold standard?].

Authors:  M-A Weber
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  PET/MRI and PET/CT: is there room for both at the top of the food chain?

Authors:  Torsten Kuwert; Philipp Ritt
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-11-19       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 3.  Hybrid MR-PET in Neuroimaging.

Authors:  S Bisdas; C Lá Fougere; U Ernemann
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.649

Review 4.  Combined PET/MRI: Multi-modality Multi-parametric Imaging Is Here: Summary Report of the 4th International Workshop on PET/MR Imaging; February 23-27, 2015, Tübingen, Germany.

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

5.  Comprehensive anatomical and functional imaging in patients with type I neurofibromatosis using simultaneous FDG-PET/MRI.

Authors:  Christian Philipp Reinert; Martin Ulrich Schuhmann; Benjamin Bender; Isabel Gugel; Christian la Fougère; Jürgen Schäfer; Sergios Gatidis
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-12-08       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 6.  Clinical pediatric positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance program: a guide to successful implementation.

Authors:  Sandra Saade-Lemus; Elad Nevo; Iman Soliman; Hansel J Otero; Ralph W Magee; Elizabeth T Drum; Lisa J States
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2020-02-19

7.  How to Provide Gadolinium-Free PET/MR Cancer Staging of Children and Young Adults in Less than 1 h: the Stanford Approach.

Authors:  Anne M Muehe; Ashok J Theruvath; Lillian Lai; Maryam Aghighi; Andrew Quon; Samantha J Holdsworth; Jia Wang; Sandra Luna-Fineman; Neyssa Marina; Ranjana Advani; Jarrett Rosenberg; Heike E Daldrup-Link
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 3.488

8.  Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of PET/MRI to PET/CT-acquired FDG brain exams for seizure focus detection: a prospective study.

Authors:  Michael J Paldino; Erica Yang; Jeremy Y Jones; Nadia Mahmood; Andrew Sher; Wei Zhang; Shireen Hayatghaibi; Ramkumar Krishnamurthy; Victor Seghers
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2017-05-16

9.  Defining optimal tracer activities in pediatric oncologic whole-body 18F-FDG-PET/MRI.

Authors:  Sergios Gatidis; Holger Schmidt; Christian la Fougère; Konstantin Nikolaou; Nina F Schwenzer; Jürgen F Schäfer
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 10.  MR Imaging-Guided Attenuation Correction of PET Data in PET/MR Imaging.

Authors:  David Izquierdo-Garcia; Ciprian Catana
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2016-01-26
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.