PET/CT imaging techniques, considerations, and artifacts

Journal of Thoracic Imaging

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 99-110

  Mawlawi, Osama ^a   Pan, Tinsu ^a   Macapinlac, Homer A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

CT attenuation correction; PET CT; PET CT artifacts

Indexed keywords

ARTIFACT; ARTIFACT REDUCTION; BREATHING PATTERN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DISPLAY SYSTEM; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE INTENSIFIER; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; LIGHT ABSORPTION; PATIENT POSITIONING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; TOOTH FILLING; TREATMENT PLANNING;

EID: 33745219462     PISSN: 08835993     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005382-200605000-00002     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (73)

1. Smith TA. FDG uptake, tumor characteristics and response to therapy: a review. Nucl Med Commun. 1998;19:97-105.
2. Delbeke D. Oncological applications of FDG PET imaging: brain tumors, colorectal cancer, lymphoma and melanoma. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:591-603.
3. Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, et al. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nuc Med. 2001;42(Suppl 1):1S-93S .
4. Bommanji JB, Costa DC, Ell PJ. Clinical role of positron emission tomography in oncology. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2:157-164.
5. Hustinx R, Benard F, Alavi A. Whole body FDG-PET imaging in the management of patients with cancer. Semin Nucl Med. 2002;32:35-46.
6. Rydberg J, Liang Y, Teague SD. Fundamentals of multislice CT. Radiol Clin North Am. 2003;41:465-474.
7. Beigelman-Aubry C, Hill C, Guibal A, et al. Multi-detector row CT and postprocessing techniques in the assessment of diffuse lung disease. Radiographics. 2005;25:1639-1652.
8. James G. Ravenel, Page McAdams H, Martine Remy-Jardin, et al. Multidimensional imaging of the thorax: practical applications. J Thorac Imaging. 2001;16:269-281
9. Goerres GW, von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC. Why most PET of lung and head-and-neck cancer will be PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(Suppl 1):66S-71S.
10. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500-2507
11. Gould MK, Kuschner WG, Rydzak CE, et al. Test performance of positron emission tomography and computed tomography for mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:879-892.
12. Antoch G, Stattaus J, Nemat AT, et al. Non-small cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. Radiology. 2003;229:526-533
13. Mawlawi O, Podoloff DA, Kohlmyer S, et al. Performance characteristics of a newly developed PET/CT scanner using NEMA standards in 2D and 3D modes. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1734-1742.
14. Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Mulnix T, et al. PET performance measurements for an LSO-based combined PET/CT scanner using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2001 standard. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:813-821.
15. Surti S, Karp JS. Imaging characteristics of a 3-dimensional GSO whole-body PET camera. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1040-1049.
16. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369-1379.
17. Beyer T, Rosenbaum S, Veit P, et al. Respiration artifacts in whole-body (18)F-FDG PET/CT studies with combined PET/CT tomographs employing spiral CT technology with 1 to 16 detector rows. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005;32:1429-1439.
18. Hamblen SM, Lowe VJ. Clinical 18F-FDG oncology patient preparation techniques. J Nucl Med Technol. 2003;31:3-7
19. DiFilippo FP, Brunken RC. Do implanted pacemaker leads and ICD leads cause metal-related artifact in cardiac PET/CT? J Nucl Med. 2005;46:436-443.
20. 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
21. 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.
22. Ratib O. PET/CT image navigation and communication. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(Suppl 1):46S-55S.
23. Bockisch A, Beyer T, Antoch G, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography-imaging protocols, artifacts, and pitfalls. Mol Imaging Biol. 2004;6:188-199.
24. Bailey DL. Transmission scanning in emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25:774-787.
25. Hubbell JH, Seltzer SM. Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients. National Institute of Standards and technology, Gaithersburg, MD. Available at: http://physic.nist.gov/xaamdi.
26. Burger C, Goerres G, Schoenes S, et al. PET attenuation coefficients from CT images: experimental evaluation of the transformation of CT into PET 511-keV attenuation coefficients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:922-927.
27. Bai C, Shao L, Da Silva AJ, et al. A generalized model for the conversion from CT numbers to linear attenuation coefficients. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2003;50:1510-1515.
28. Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T, et al. Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET-CT scanner. Med Phys. 1998;25:2046-2053.
29. Kamel E, Hany TF, Burger C, et al. CT vs. 68Ge attenuation correction in a combined PET-CT system: evaluation of the effect of lowering the CT tube current. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:346-350.
30. 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
31. Cook GJ, Wegner EA, Fogelman I. Pitfalls and artifacts in 18FDG PET and PET/CT oncologic imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2004;34:122-133
32. Truong MT, Erasmus JJ, Macapinlac HA, et al. Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: normal variants and pitfalls. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2005;29:205-209.
33. Sureshbabu W, Mawlawi O. PET/CT imaging artifacts. J Nucl Med Technol. 2005;33:156-161.
34. von Schulthess GK. Normal PET and PET/CT Body Scans: Imaging Pitfalls and Artifacts. In: Schultess GKV, ed. Clinical PET, PET/CT and SPECT/CT: Combined Anatomic-Molecular Imaging. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2002.
35. Kamel EM, Burger C, Buck A, et al. Impact of metallic dental implants on CT-based attenuation correction in a combined PET/CT scanner. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:724-728.
36. 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.
37. Zhao S, Robeltson DD, Wang G, et al. X-ray CT metal artifact reduction using wavelets: an application for imaging total hip prostheses. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2000;19:1238-1247.
38. Mirzaei S, Guerchaft M, Bonnier C, et al. Use of segmented CT transmission map to avoid metal artifacts in PET images by a PET-CT device. BMC Nucl Med. 2005;5:3.
39. Yazdi M, Gingras L, Beaulieu L. An adaptive approach to metal artifact reduction in helical computed tomography for radiation therapy treatment planning: experimental and clinical studies. Int J Radiol Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:1224-1231
40. Coolens C, Childs PJ. Calibration of CT Hounsfield units for radiotherapy treatment planning of patients with metallic hip prostheses: the use of the extended CT-scale. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:603-1591.
41. Mahnken AH, Raupach R, Wildberger JE, et al. A new algorithm for metal artifact reduction in computed tomography: in vitro and in vivo evaluation after total hip replacement. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:769-775.
42. Osman MM, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, et al. Respiratory motion artifacts on PET emission images obtained using CT attenuation correction on PET-CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:603-606.
43. Goerres GW, Kamel E, Heidelberg TN, et al. PET-CT image coregistration in the thorax: influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:351-360.
44. Beyer T, Antoch G, Blodgett T, et al. Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:588-596.
45. Cohade C, Osman M, Marshall LN, et al. PET-CT: accuracy of PET and CT spatial registration of lung lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:721-726.
46. Pevsner A, Nehmeh SA, Humm JL, et al. Effect of motion on tracer activity determination in CT attenuation corrected PET images: a lung phantom study. Med Phys. 2005;32:2358-2362.
47. Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Pan T, et al. The CT motion quantitation of lung lesions and its impact on PET-measured SUVs. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1287-1292.
48. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Pan T, et al. Four-dimensional (4D) PET/CT imaging of the thorax. Med Phys. 2004;31:3179-3186.
49. Pan T, Mawlawi O, Nehmeh SA, et al. Attenuation correction of PET images with respiration-averaged CT images in PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1481-1487.
50. Brunken RC, Difilippo FP, Howe WC, et al. Measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction using gated cardiac PET with CT based attenuation correction. JNM. 2005;46(Suppl 2):173P.
51. Dieckmann W, Maass-Moreno R, Le Meunier L, et al. Is CT based cardiac attenuation correction affected by cardiac contraction? JNM. 2005;46:(Suppl 2)106P.
52. 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.
53. 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.
54. Dizendorf E, Hany TF, Buck A, et al. Cause and magnitude of the error induced by oral CT contrast in CT-based attenuation correction of PET emission studies. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:732-738.
55. 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.
56. Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Munden RF, et al. Quantifying the effect of intravenous contrast media on integrated PET/CT imaging: clinical evaluation. Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186:308-319.
57. Nehmen SA, Erdi YE, Kalaigian H, et al. Correction for oral contrast artifacts in CT attenuation-corrected PET images obtained by combined PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1940-1944.
58. Carney J, Beyer T, Brasse D, et al. CT based attenuation correction for PET-CT scanners in the presence of agent. Nuclear Science Symposium Conference record, 2002. IEEE. 2002;3:1443-1446.
59. 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. Epub February 5, 2004 .
60. Hasegawa BH, Lang TF, Brown EL. Object specific attenuation correction of SPECT with correlated dual-energy X-ray CT. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1993;NS-40:1242-1252.
61. Bacharach SL, Freedman NMT, Maass-Moreno R, et al. Dual enrgy CT for detecting contrast media in PET/CT. JNM. 2005;46(Suppl 2):168P.
62. Kinahan PE, Alesio AM, Fessier JA, et al. A simple dual energy method for CT-based attenuation correction that accounts for contrast agents in PET/CT imaging. JNM. 2005;46(Suppl 2):113P.
63. Carney J, Beyer T, Yap JT, et al. CT-Based Attenuation Correction for PET/CT Scanners. In: Schulthess GKV, ed. Clinical Molecular Anatomic Imaging: PET, PET/CT, and SPECT/CT. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2003:51-58.
64. Mawlawi O, Erasmus JJ, Pan T, et al. Truncation artifact in PET/CT imaging: impact on measurements of activity concentration and assessment of a correction algorithm. Am J Roentgenol. 2006; In-press.
65. Carney J, Townsend DW. CT-based attenuation correction: the effects of imaging with the arms in the field of view. JNM. 2001;42:56P-57P.
66. Lonn AH, Hsieh J, Stearns C, et al. Evaluation of extension of the CT attenuation map in PET-CT. JNM. 2003;44:P123.
67. Hsieh J, Chao E, Thibault J, et al. A novel reconstruction algorithm to extend the CT scan field of view. Medical Physics. 2004;31:2385-2391.
68. Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Schwarz K, et al. Efficient correction for CT image artifacts caused by objects extending outside the scan field of view. Med Phys. 2000;27:39-46.
69. Bradley J, et al. Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59:78-86.
70. Scarfone C, Lavely WC, Cmelak AJ, et al. Prospective feasibility trial of radiotherapy target definition for head and neck cancer using 3-dimensional PET and CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:543-552.
71. Ashamalla H, Rafla S, Parikh K, et al. The contribution of integrated PET/CT to the evolving definition of treatment volumes in radiation treatment planning in lung cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63:1016-1023.
72. Nestle U, Kremp S, Schaefer-Schuler A, et al. Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1342-1348.
73. Shekhar R, Walimbe V, Raja S, et al. Automated 3-dimensional elastic registration of whole-body PET and CT from separate or combined scanners. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1488-1496.