Literature DB >> 33550515

Digital PET/CT allows for shorter acquisition protocols or reduced radiopharmaceutical dose in [18F]-FDG PET/CT.

Ian Alberts1, Christos Sachpekidis2, George Prenosil2, Marco Viscione2, Karl Peter Bohn2, Clemens Mingels2, Kuangyu Shi2, Ali Ashar-Oromieh2, Axel Rominger2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To establish the feasibility of shorter acquisition times (and by analogy, applied activity) on tumour detection and lesion contrast in digital PET/CT.
METHODS: Twenty-one randomly selected patients who underwent oncological [18F]-FDG PET/CT on a digital PET/CT were retrospectively evaluated. Scan data were anonymously obtained and reconstructed in list-mode acquisition for a standard 2 min/bed position (bp), 1 min/bp and 30 s/bp (100%, 50% and 25% time or applied activity, respectively). Scans were randomized and read by two nuclear medicine physicians in a consensus read. Readers were blind to clinical details. Scans were evaluated for the number of pathological lesions detected. Measured uptake for lesions was evaluated by maximum and mean standardized uptake value (SUVmax and SUVmean, respectively) and tumour-to-backround ratio (TBR) were compared. Agreement between the three acquisitions was compared by Krippendorf's alpha.
RESULTS: Overall n = 100 lesions were identified in the 2 min and 1 min/bp acquisitions and n = 98 lesions in the 30 s/bp acquisitions. Agreement between the three acquisitions with respect to lesion number and tumour-to-background ratio showed almost perfect agreement (K's α = 0.999). SUVmax, SUVmean and TBR likewise showed > 98% agreement, with longer acquisitions being associated with slightly higher mean TBR (2 min/bp 7.94 ± 4.41 versus 30 s/bp 7.84 ± 4.22, p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: Shorter acquisition times have traditionally been associated with reduced lesion detectability or the requirement for larger amounts of radiotracer activity. These data confirm that this is not the case for new-generation digital PET scanners, where the known higher sensitivity results in clinically adequate images for shorter acquisitions. Only a small variation in the semi-quantitative parameters SUVmax, SUVmean and TBR was seen, confirming that either reduction of acquisition time or (by analogy) applied activity can be reduced as much as 75% in digital PET/CT without apparent clinical detriment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Digital PET; List mode acquisition; PET/CT; Positron emission tomography

Year:  2021        PMID: 33550515      PMCID: PMC7981298          DOI: 10.1007/s12149-021-01588-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Nucl Med        ISSN: 0914-7187            Impact factor:   2.668


  26 in total

1.  Digital PET/CT: a new intriguing chance for clinical nuclear medicine and personalized molecular imaging.

Authors:  Orazio Schillaci; Nicoletta Urbano
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-03-11       Impact factor: 9.236

2.  Performance Evaluation of the Vereos PET/CT System According to the NEMA NU2-2012 Standard.

Authors:  Ivo Rausch; Agustin Ruiz; Itziar Valverde-Pascual; Jacobo Cal-González; Thomas Beyer; Ignasi Carrio
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value.

Authors:  Martin A Lodge; Muhammad A Chaudhry; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2012-05-24       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Lesion Detection and Administered Activity.

Authors:  V Ralph McCready; Sabina Dizdarevic; Thomas Beyer
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2020-04-03       Impact factor: 10.057

5.  Digital vs. analog PET/CT: intra-subject comparison of the SUVmax in target lesions and reference regions.

Authors:  Francisco Fuentes-Ocampo; Diego Alfonso López-Mora; Albert Flotats; Gabriela Paillahueque; Valle Camacho; Joan Duch; Alejandro Fernández; Anna Domènech; Montserrat Estorch; Ignasi Carrió
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Image Quality and Diagnostic Performance of a Digital PET Prototype in Patients with Oncologic Diseases: Initial Experience and Comparison with Analog PET.

Authors:  Nghi C Nguyen; Jose L Vercher-Conejero; Abdus Sattar; Michael A Miller; Piotr J Maniawski; David W Jordan; Raymond F Muzic; Kuan-Hao Su; James K O'Donnell; Peter F Faulhaber
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 7.  From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors.

Authors:  Richard L Wahl; Heather Jacene; Yvette Kasamon; Martin A Lodge
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Image Quality and Activity Optimization in Oncologic 18F-FDG PET Using the Digital Biograph Vision PET/CT System.

Authors:  Joyce van Sluis; Ronald Boellaard; Rudi A J O Dierckx; Gilles N Stormezand; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Walter Noordzij
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Benefit of Improved Performance with State-of-the Art Digital PET/CT for Lesion Detection in Oncology.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Varsha Viswanath; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Maurizio Conti; Michael E Casey; Joel S Karp
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 11.082

10.  SUV variability in EARL-accredited conventional and digital PET.

Authors:  Daniëlle Koopman; Pieter L Jager; Cornelis H Slump; Siert Knollema; Jorn A van Dalen
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2019-12-10       Impact factor: 3.138

View more
  9 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation of a deep learning-based framework to generate whole-body attenuation maps using LSO background radiation in long axial FOV PET scanners.

Authors:  Hasan Sari; Mohammadreza Teimoorisichani; Clemens Mingels; Ian Alberts; Vladimir Panin; Deepak Bharkhada; Song Xue; George Prenosil; Kuangyu Shi; Maurizio Conti; Axel Rominger
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 10.057

2.  Cumulative radiation doses due to nuclear medicine examinations: a systematic review.

Authors:  Marco Brambilla; Agnieszka Kuchcińska; Roberta Matheoud; Alfredo Muni
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2021-08-11       Impact factor: 3.629

3.  Combined [68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 and low-dose 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT using a long-axial field of view scanner for patients referred for [177Lu]-PSMA-radioligand therapy.

Authors:  Ian Alberts; Robin Schepers; Konstantinos Zeimpekis; Hasan Sari; Axel Rominger; Ali Afshar-Oromieh
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Medical Radiation Exposure Reduction in PET via Super-Resolution Deep Learning Model.

Authors:  Takaaki Yoshimura; Atsushi Hasegawa; Shoki Kogame; Keiichi Magota; Rina Kimura; Shiro Watanabe; Kenji Hirata; Hiroyuki Sugimori
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-31

5.  Total-body [18F]FDG PET/CT scan has stepped into the arena: the faster, the better. Is it always true?

Authors:  Luca Filippi; Orazio Schillaci
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-08       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 6.  Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation.

Authors:  Julian M M Rogasch; Frank Hofheinz; Lutz van Heek; Conrad-Amadeus Voltin; Ronald Boellaard; Carsten Kobe
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-02-10

7.  Abbreviated scan protocols to capture 18F-FDG kinetics for long axial FOV PET scanners.

Authors:  Varsha Viswanath; Hasan Sari; Austin R Pantel; Maurizio Conti; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Clemens Mingels; Ian Alberts; Lars Eriksson; Kuangyu Shi; Axel Rominger; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Phantom-based acquisition time and image reconstruction parameter optimisation for oncologic FDG PET/CT examinations using a digital system.

Authors:  Pedro Fragoso Costa; Walter Jentzen; Alissa Brahmer; Ilektra-Antonia Mavroeidi; Fadi Zarrad; Lale Umutlu; Wolfgang P Fendler; Christoph Rischpler; Ken Herrmann; Maurizio Conti; Robert Seifert; Miriam Sraieb; Manuel Weber; David Kersting
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2022-08-18       Impact factor: 4.638

9.  A cross-scanner and cross-tracer deep learning method for the recovery of standard-dose imaging quality from low-dose PET.

Authors:  Song Xue; Rui Guo; Karl Peter Bohn; Jared Matzke; Marco Viscione; Ian Alberts; Hongping Meng; Chenwei Sun; Miao Zhang; Min Zhang; Raphael Sznitman; Georges El Fakhri; Axel Rominger; Biao Li; Kuangyu Shi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2021-12-24       Impact factor: 10.057

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.