Michael J Paldino1, Erica Yang2, Jeremy Y Jones1, Nadia Mahmood1, Andrew Sher1, Wei Zhang3, Shireen Hayatghaibi4, Ramkumar Krishnamurthy5, Victor Seghers1. 1. Department of Radiology, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St., #470, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. 2. Department of Radiology, SimonMed Imaging, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 3. Outcomes and Impact Service, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St., Houston, TX, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, Texas Children's Hospital, 6621 Fannin St., #470, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. sehayatg@texaschildrens.org. 5. Department of Radiology, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is great interest in positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) as a clinical tool due to its capacity to provide diverse diagnostic information in a single exam. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this exam is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of PET/MR-acquired [F-18]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) brain exams to that of PET/CT with respect to identifying seizure foci in children with localization-related epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, prospective study. All patients referred for clinical FDG-PET/CT exams of the brain at our institution for a diagnosis of localization-related epilepsy were prospectively recruited to undergo an additional FDG-PET acquisition on a tandem PET/MR system. Attenuation-corrected FDG images acquired at PET/MR and PET/CT were interpreted independently by five expert readers. Readers were blinded to the scanner used for acquisition and attenuation correction as well as all other clinical and imaging data. A Likert scale scoring system (1-5) was used to assess image quality. The locale of seizure origin determined at multidisciplinary epilepsy surgery work rounds was considered the reference standard. Non-inferiority testing for paired data was used to compare the diagnostic accuracy of PET/MR to that of PET/CT. RESULTS: The final study population comprised 35 patients referred for a diagnosis of localization-related epilepsy (age range: 2-19 years; median: 11 years; 21 males, 14 females). Image quality did not differ significantly between the two modalities. The accuracy of PET/MR was not inferior to that of PET/CT for localization of a seizure focus (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET images acquired on a PET/MR scanner and generated using MR-based attenuation correction was not inferior to that of PET images processed by traditional CT-based correction.
BACKGROUND: There is great interest in positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) as a clinical tool due to its capacity to provide diverse diagnostic information in a single exam. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this exam is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of PET/MR-acquired [F-18]2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) brain exams to that of PET/CT with respect to identifying seizure foci in children with localization-related epilepsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent were obtained for this Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant, prospective study. All patients referred for clinical FDG-PET/CT exams of the brain at our institution for a diagnosis of localization-related epilepsy were prospectively recruited to undergo an additional FDG-PET acquisition on a tandem PET/MR system. Attenuation-corrected FDG images acquired at PET/MR and PET/CT were interpreted independently by five expert readers. Readers were blinded to the scanner used for acquisition and attenuation correction as well as all other clinical and imaging data. A Likert scale scoring system (1-5) was used to assess image quality. The locale of seizure origin determined at multidisciplinary epilepsy surgery work rounds was considered the reference standard. Non-inferiority testing for paired data was used to compare the diagnostic accuracy of PET/MR to that of PET/CT. RESULTS: The final study population comprised 35 patients referred for a diagnosis of localization-related epilepsy (age range: 2-19 years; median: 11 years; 21 males, 14 females). Image quality did not differ significantly between the two modalities. The accuracy of PET/MR was not inferior to that of PET/CT for localization of a seizure focus (P=0.017). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET images acquired on a PET/MR scanner and generated using MR-based attenuation correction was not inferior to that of PET images processed by traditional CT-based correction.
Authors: Georg Schramm; Jens Langner; Frank Hofheinz; Jan Petr; Bettina Beuthien-Baumann; Ivan Platzek; Jörg Steinbach; Jörg Kotzerke; Jörg van den Hoff Journal: MAGMA Date: 2012-08-26 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: P Krsek; B Maton; P Jayakar; P Dean; B Korman; G Rey; C Dunoyer; E Pacheco-Jacome; G Morrison; J Ragheb; H V Vinters; T Resnick; M Duchowny Journal: Neurology Date: 2008-11-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Arthur Varoquaux; Olivier Rager; Antoine Poncet; Bénédicte M A Delattre; Osman Ratib; Christoph D Becker; Pavel Dulguerov; Nicolas Dulguerov; Habib Zaidi; Minerva Becker Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2013-10-10 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Katalin Borbély; Miklós Emri; István Kenessey; Márton Tóth; Júlia Singer; Péter Barsi; Zsolt Vajda; Endre Pál; Zoltán Tóth; Thomas Beyer; Tamás Dóczi; Gábor Bajzik; Dániel Fabó; József Janszky; Zsófia Jordán; Dániel Fajtai; Anna Kelemen; Vera Juhos; Max Wintermark; Ferenc Nagy; Mariann Moizs; Dávid Nagy; János Lückl; Imre Repa Journal: Biomedicines Date: 2022-04-20
Authors: Vejay N Vakharia; John S Duncan; Juri-Alexander Witt; Christian E Elger; Richard Staba; Jerome Engel Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2018-04-10 Impact factor: 10.422