Practical issues in abdominal PET/CT

Applied Radiology

Volumn 34, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 8-18

  Blake, Michael A ^a   Slattery, James ^a   Sahani, Dushyant V ^a   Kalra, Mannudeep K ^a,b  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; DIURETIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; GERMANIUM; GLUCOSE; RADIOISOTOPE; TRACER;

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ALGORITHM; ANATOMY; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BREATHING MECHANICS; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DRUG ABSORPTION; DRUG UPTAKE; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PROSTHESIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIODIAGNOSIS; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 28044435087     PISSN: 01609963     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Rohren EM, Turkington TG, Coleman RE. Clinical applications of PET in oncology. Radiology. 2004;231: 305-332.
2. Kostakoglu L, Agress H Jr., Goldsmith SJ. Clinical role of FDG PET in evaluation of cancer patients. RadioGraphics. 2003;23:315-340.
3. Kluetz PG, Meltzer CC, Villemagne VL, et al. Combined PET/CT imaging in oncology. Impact on patient management. Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;3: 223-230.
4. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Blodgett TM. Dual-modality PET/CT tomography for clinical oncology. Q J Nucl Med. 2002;46:24-34.
5. Cohade C, Osman M, Leal J, Wahl RL. Direct comparison of (18)F-FDG PET and PET/CT in patients with colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2003;44: 1797-803.
6. Schoder H, Larson SM, Yeung HW. PET/CT in oncology: Integration into clinical management of lymphoma, melanoma, and gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med; 2004;45 (suppl 1):72S-81S.
7. Townsend DW, Cherry SR. Combining anatomy and function: The path to true image fusion. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:1968-1974.
8. Shreve PD, Anzai Y, Wahl RL. Pitfalls in oncologic diagnosis with FDG PET imaging: Physiologic and benign variants. RadioGraphics. 1999;19:61-77.
9. Shirkoda A, ed. Variants and Pitfalls in Body Imaging. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000.
10. Cook GJ, Wegner EA, Fogelman I. Pitfalls and artifacts in 18FDG PET and PET/CT oncologic imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2004;34:122-33.
11. Beyer T, Antoch G, Muller S, et al. Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(suppl 1):25S-35S.
12. Wahl RL. Why nearly all PET of abdominal and pelvic cancers will be performed as PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:82S-95S.
13. Fischman AJ, Thrall JH. Who should read and interpret 18F-FDG PET studies? J Nucl Med. 2003; 44:1197-1199.
14. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Beyer T, et al. To enhance or not to enhance? 18F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(suppl 1):56S-65S.
15. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Stattaus J, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography-CT: Optimized CT using oral and IV contrast materials. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:1555-1560.
16. Dizendorf EV, Treyer V, Von Schulthess GK, Hany TF. Application of oral contrast media in coregistered positron emission tomography-CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:477-481.
17. Goerres GW, Hany TF, Kamel E, et al. Head and neck imaging with PET and PET/CT: Artefacts from dental metallic implants. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:367-370.
18. Goerres GW, Ziegler SI, Burger C, et al. Artifacts at PET and PET/CT caused by metallic hip prosthetic material. Radiology. 2003;226:577-584.
19. Bujenovic S, Mannting F, Chakrabarti R, Ladnier D. Artifactual 2-deoxy-2-[(18)F]fluoro-D-glucose localization surrounding metallic objects in a PET/CT scanner using CT-based attenuation correction. Mol Imaging Biol. 2003;5:20-22.
20. Goerres GW, Burger C, Schwitter MR, et al. PET/CT of the abdomen: Optimizing the patient breathing pattern. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:734-739.
21. Goerres GW, Burger C, Kamel E, et al. Respiration-induced attenuation artifact at PET/CT: Technical considerations. Radiology. 2003;226:906-910.
22. Nakamoto Y, Osman M, Cohade C, et al. PET/CT: Comparison of quantitative tracer uptake between germanium and CT transmission attenuation-corrected images. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1137-1143.
23. Carney JP, Townsend DW. CT-based attenuation correction for PET/CT scanners. In: Schulthess GV, ed. Clinical PET, PET/CT and SPECT/CT: Combined Anatomic-Molecular Imaging. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
24. Cohade C, Osman M, Nakamoto Y, et al. Initial experience with oral contrast in PET/CT: Phantom and clinical studies. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:412-416.
25. Dizendorf E, Hany TF, Buck A, et al. Cause and magnitude of the error induced by oral CT contrast agent in CT-based attenuation correction of PET emission studies. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:732-738.
26. Nakamoto Y, Chin BB, Kraitchman DL, et al. Effects of nonionic intravenous contrast agents at PET/CT imaging: Phantom and canine studies. Radiology. 2003;227:817-824.
27. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Egelhof T, et al. Focal tracer uptake: A potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. J Nucl Med. 2002; 43:1339-1342
28. Antoch G, Kuehl H, Kanja J, et al. Dual-modality PET/CT scanning with negative oral contrast agent to avoid artifacts: Introduction and evaluation. Radiology. 2004;230:879-885.
29. Jerusalem G, Beguin Y, Fassotte MF, et al. Whole-body positron emission tomography using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose for posttreatment evaluation in Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma has higher diagnostic and prognostic value than classical computed tomography scan imaging. Blood. 1999; 94:429-433.
30. Elstrom R, Guan L, Baker G, et al.Utility of FDG-PET scanning in lymphoma by WHO classification. Blood. 2003;15;101:3875-3876.
31. Oureshy A, Kubota K, Iwata R, et al. Localization and reduction of FDG intestinal uptake: Tissue distribution and autoradiography study. Nucl Med Commun. 2002;23:388.
32. Brigid GA, Flanagan FL, Dehdashti F. Whole-body positron emission tomography: Normal variations, pitfalls, and technical considerations. Am J Roentgenol. 1997;169:1675-1680.
33. Miraldi F, Vesselle H, Faulhaber PF, et al. Elimination of artifactual accumulation of FDG in PET imaging of colorectal cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 1998;23:3-7.
34. Moran JK, Lee HB, Blaufox MD. Optimization of urinary FDG excretion during PET imaging. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1352-1357.
35. Vesselle HJ, Miraldi FD. FDG PET of the retroperitoneum: Normal anatomy, variants, pathologic conditions, and strategies to avoid diagnostic pitfalls. RadioGraphics. 1998;18:805-823.
36. Kang DE, White RL Jr, Zuger JH, et al. Clinical use of fluorodeoxyglucose F18 positron emission tomography for detection of renal cell carcinoma. J Urol. 2004; 171:1806-1809.
37. Osman MM, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, et al. Clinically significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET/CT: Frequency in 300 patients. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:240-243.
38. Teefey SA, Hildeboldt CC, Dehdashti F, et al. Detection of primary hepatic malignancy in liver transplant candidates: Prospective comparison of CT, MR imaging, US, and PET. Radiology. 2003;226:533-542.
39. Yao SZ, Zhang CQ, Chen J, et al. Clinical evaluation of 18F-FDG PET-CT in detecting malignant liver tumors [in Chinese]. Di Yi Jun Yi Da Xue Xue Bao. 2003;23:1214-1216.
40. Shields AF, Graham MM, Spence AM. The role of PET imaging in clinical oncology: A current status report. Nuc Med Annual. 1995:129-168.
41. Nakamoto Y, Saga T, Ishimori T, et al. FDG-PET of autoimmune-related pancreatitis: Preliminary results. Eur J Nucl Med. 2000;27:1835-1838.
42. Friess H, Langhans J, Ebert M, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cancer by 2[18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography. Gut. 1995:36; 771-777.
43. Bares R, Klever P, Hauptmann S, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET in vivo evaluation of pancreatic glucose metabolism for detection of pancreatic cancer. Radiology. 1994;192:79-86.
44. Kawashima A, Sandler CM, Fishman EK, et al. Spectrum of CT findings in nonmalignant disease of the adrenal gland. RadioGraphics. 1998;18:393-412.
45. Boland GW, Lee MJ, Gazelle GS, et al. Characterization of adrenal masses using unenhanced CT: An analysis of the CT literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:201-204.
46. Lee MJ, Hahn PF, Papanicolaou N, et al. Benign and malignant adrenal masses: CT distinction with attenuation coefficients, size, and observer analysis. Radiology. 1991;179:415-418.
47. McNicholas MM, Lee MJ, Mayo-Smith WW, et al. An imaging algorithm for the differential diagnosis of adrenal adenomas and metastases. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1995;165:1453-1459.
48. Miyake H, Takaki H, Matsumoto S, et al. Adrenal nonhyperfunctioning adenoma and nonadenoma: CT attenuation value as discriminative index. Abdom Imaging. 1995;20:559-562.
49. Boland GW, Hahn PF, Pane C, Mueller PR. Adrenal masses: Characterization with delayed contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology. 1997;202:693-696.
50. Szolar DH, Kammerhuber FH. Adrenal adenomas and nonadenomas: Assessment of washout at delayed contrast-enhanced CT. Radiology. 1998; 207:369-375.
51. Korobkin M, Brodeur FJ, Francis IR, et al. Delayed enhanced CT for differentiation of benign from malignant adrenal masses. Radiology. 1996;200:737-742.
52. Yun M, Kim W, Alnafisi N, et al. 18F-FDG PET in characterizing adrenal lesions detected on CT or MRI. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1795-1799.
53. Boland GW, Goldberg MA, Lee MJ, et al. Indeterminate adrenal mass in patients with cancer: Evaluation at PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology. 1995;194:131-134.
54. Maurea S, Klain M, Mainolfi C, et al. The diagnostic role of radionuclide imaging in evaluation of patients with nonhypersecreting adrenal masses. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:884-892.
55. Shulkin BL, Thompson NW, Shapiro B, et al. Pheochromocytomas: Imaging with 2-[fluorine-18] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET. Radiology. 1999;212: 35-41.
56. Erasmus JJ, Patz EF Jr, McAdams HP, et al. Evaluation of adrenal masses in patients with bronchogenic carcinoma using 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168:1357-1360.
57. Yeung HW, Grewel RK, Gonen M, et al. Patterns of (18)F-FDG uptake in adipose tissue and muscle: A potential source of false-positives for PET. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1789-1796.
58. Lerman H, Metser U, Grisaru D, et al. Normal and abnormal 18F-FDG endometrial and ovarian uptake in pre- and postmenopausal patients: Assessment by PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:266-271.