| Literature DB >> 35585129 |
Niklas Lohaus1,2,3, Florian Enderlin1,3, Stephan Skawran1,2,3, Alexander Maurer1,3, Ahmad M A Abukwaik1, Daniel Franzen3,4,5, Martin W Huellner1,3, Michael Messerli6,7.
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstruction on quantitative and qualitative aspects of 2-[18F]FDG-avid pulmonary nodules compared to conventional ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstruction method. Ninety-one patients with 144 2-[18F]FDG-avid pulmonary nodules (all ≤ 20 mm) undergoing PET/CT for oncological (re-)staging were retrospectively included. Quantitative parameters in BSREM and OSEM (including point spread function modelling) were measured, including maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). Nodule conspicuity in BSREM and OSEM images was evaluated by two readers. Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test was used to compare quantitative and qualitative parameters in BSREM and OSEM. Pulmonary nodule SUVmax was significantly higher in BSREM images compared to OSEM images [BSREM 5.4 (1.2-20.7), OSEM 3.6 (0.7-17.4); p = 0.0001]. In a size-based analysis, the relative increase in SUVmax was more pronounced in smaller nodules (≤ 7 mm) as compared to larger nodules (8-10 mm, or > 10 mm). Lesion conspicuity was higher in BSREM than in OSEM (p < 0.0001). BSREM reconstruction results in a significant increase in SUVmax and a significantly improved conspicuity of small 2-[18F]FDG-avid pulmonary nodules compared to OSEM reconstruction. Digital 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT reading may be enhanced with BSREM as small lesion conspicuity is improved.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35585129 PMCID: PMC9117286 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-09904-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Demographic data of study subjects (n = 91).
| Female/male, | 36 (40%)/55 (60%) |
| Age, years | 66 ± 11 (29–87) |
| Body weight, kg | 71 ± 17 (40–109) |
| Body height, m | 1.70 ± 0.10 (1.48–1.94) |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 24.6 ± 5.1 (14.5–38.6) |
| Blood glucose level at time of injection, mg/dl | 96 ± 21 (54–171) |
| Injected FDG dose, MBq | 183 ± 75 (87–302) |
| PET/CT scan post injection time, min | 62 ± 10 (45–99) |
| Lung cancer | 32 (35%) |
| Head and neck cancer | 9 (10%) |
| Colon cancer | 9 (10%) |
| Melanoma | 9 (10%) |
| Unknown primary cancer | 6 (7%) |
| Lymphoma | 5 (5%) |
| Breast cancer | 4 (4%) |
| Urogenital cancer | 4 (4%) |
| Small bowel cancer | 3 (3%) |
| Cholangiocarcinoma | 2 (2%) |
| Esophageal cancer | 2 (2%) |
| Pancreatic cancer | 2 (2%) |
| Rectal cancer | 1 (1%) |
| Kaposi sarcoma | 1 (1%) |
| Soft tissue cancer | 1 (1%) |
| Thyroid cancer | 1 (1%) |
Values are given as absolute numbers and percentages in parenthesis or mean ± standard deviation (range).
Results of quantitative PET image assessment, including maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) of the lung nodules (n = 144), nodule signal-to-background ratio (SBR), nodule signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-background ratio (CBR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) compared to ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstructions as reference.
| BSREM | OSEM | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0001 | |||
| Mean | 5.4 | 3.6 | |
| Median | 4.0 | 2.7 | |
| Range | 1.2–20.7 | 0.7–17.4 | |
| 0.0001 | |||
| Mean | 3.3 | 2.2 | |
| Median | 2.4 | 1.6 | |
| Range | 0.7- 15.7 | 0.4–8.6 | |
| 0.0001 | |||
| Mean | 21.2 | 14.6 | |
| Median | 15.9 | 10.5 | |
| Range | 3.9–89.4 | 2.5–75.7 | |
| 0.0001 | |||
| Mean | 1.2 | 0.3 | |
| Median | 0.54 | − 0.06 | |
| Range | − 0.6 to 14.7 | − 0.8 to 4.5 | |
| 0.0001 | |||
| Mean | 7.1 | 2.1 | |
| Median | 3.0 | − 0.4 | |
| Range | − 4.9 to 67.1 | − 7.2 to 37.8 |
aStatistical analysis was performed with Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test, p values < 0.05 were considered to be significant.
Relative changes of maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax), nodule signal-to-background ratio (SBR), nodule signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-background ratio (CBR), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) in block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) compared to ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstructions as reference.
| BSREM vs. OSEM | All nodules, | Nodules 1–7 mm, | Nodules 8–10 mm, | Nodules > 10 mm, |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUVmax | + 53.1 ± 44.3% | + 79.5 ± 59.5% | + 51.0 ± 30.7% | + 32.5 ± 22.5% |
| SBR | + 52.7 ± 45.0% | + 78.5 ± 62.0% | + 50.4 ± 30.4% | + 32.9 ± 22.5% |
| SNR | + 49.3 ± 42.0% | + 72.6 ± 55.0% | + 53.0 ± 29.4% | + 26.8 ± 22.8% |
| CBR | + 80.8 ± 626.8% | + 169.6 ± 944.0% | + 47.2 ± 336.4% | + 32.8 ± 355.4% |
| CNR | + 74.6 ± 587.7% | + 153.2 ± 921.3% | + 51.9 ± 338.9% | + 26.5 ± 341.3% |
Values are given as mean ± standard deviation.
Figure 1Size-based analysis of the relative increase in SUVmax showed a more pronounced quantitative impact in smaller nodules (≤ 7 mm) compared to larger nodules sized 8–10 mm and > 10 mm, (*p value = 0.05, ****p value = 0.0001). The whiskers of the box plot range from minimum to maximum.
Figure 2Graphical illustration of the quantitative impact of block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstruction on pulmonary nodule SUVmax with nodules stratified by size (left) and activity (right) in ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM). In size-based analysis, the nodule with the smallest diameter is in the top row, and the largest nodule is in the lowest row . In the activtiy-based analysis, the nodule with lowest activity in OSEM is in the top row, and the nodule with the highest activity in OSEM is in the lowest row.
Figure 3Subjective image quality ratings of reader 1 and reader 2 for ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) and block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstruction images.
Figure 4Representative images of a 63-year-old man with a body mass index of 22.2 kg/m2 and 75 kg body weight who underwent 2-[18F]FDG PET/CT for re-staging of esophageal cancer. CT images (A) show a newly developing 5 mm nodule in the right upper lobe. Subjective image quality ratings (B) of reader 1 and reader 2 for ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) and block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstruction images indicate an increased lesion conspicuity. Axial slices at the same level showing OSEM reconstruction (C,D) and BSREM reconstruction (E,F) show the 2-[18F]FDG-avid nodule.
Figure 5Analysis of nodule etiology during up to three years of follow-up is shown in a dot plot. The values of the parts per whole analysis are given in percent. All nodules (n = 144) were included.
Figure 6ROC curves for assesment of pulmonary nodules on OSEM and BSREM based on SUVmax as a single determinant of malignant etiology.