Comparison of 3 methods of automated internal carotid segmentation in human brain PET studies: Application tot he estimation of arterial input function

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 461-467

  Zanotti Fregonara, Paolo ^a,c   Maroy, Renaud ^a   Comtat, Claude ^a   Jan, Sebastien ^a   Gaura, Véronique ^a   Bar Hen, Avner ^b   Ribeiro, Maria Joao ^a   Trébossen, Régine ^a  

^a SERVICE HOSPITALIER FRÉDÉRIC JOLIOT   (France)

^b SMBH LimandBio   (France)

^c SERVICE HOSPITALIER FRÉDÉRIC JOLIOT   (France)

Author keywords

18F FDG PET; Automatic segmentation; Brain; Input function

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ACCURACY; ALGORITHM; ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; AUTOANALYSIS; BRAIN METABOLISM; CALCULATION; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; GLUCOSE BRAIN LEVEL; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERNAL CAROTID ARTERY; K MEANS ANALYSIS; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; LOCAL MEANS ANALYSIS; NORMAL HUMAN; PATLAK ANALYSIS; PHANTOM; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REFERENCE VALUE; SOFT DECISION SIMILAR COMPONENT ANALYSIS; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

ALGORITHMS; BRAIN; CAROTID ARTERY, INTERNAL; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS;

EID: 62449090875     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.059642     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Lammertsma AA. Radioligand studies: imaging and quantitative analysis. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol, 2002; 12:513-516.
2. Hall R. Vascular injuries resulting from arterial puncture of catheterization. Br J Surg. 1971;58:513-516.
3. Weinberg IN, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, et al. Validation of PET-acquired input functions for cardiac studies. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:241-247.
4. Gambhir SS, Schwaiger M, Huang SC, et al. Simple noninvasive quantification method for measuring myocardial glucose utilization in humans employing positron emission tomography and fluorine-18 deoxyglucose. J Nucl Med. 1989; 30:359-366.
5. Germano G, Chen BC, Huang SC, Gambhir SS, Hoffman EJ, Phelps ME. Use of the abdominal aorta for arterial input function determination in hepatic and renal PET studies. J Nucl Med. 1992;33:613-620.
6. 18F-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1622-1629.
7. 18-FDG PET studies. J Nucl Med 2006;47:945-949.
8. Litton JE. Input function in PET brain studies using MR-defined arteries. J Comput Assist Tomogr.1997;21:907-909.
9. 18F-iluoro-2-deoxyglucose, the Patlak method, and an image-derived input function. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1998;18:716-723.
10. Wahl LM, Asselin MC, Nahmias C. Regions of interest in the venous sinuses as input functions for quantitative PET. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:1666-1675.
11. Chen S, Bouman CA, Lowe MJ. Clustered components analysis for functional MR1. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2004;23:85-98.
12. Liptrot M, Adams KH, Martiny L, et al. Cluster analysis in kinetic modelling of the brain: a noninvasive alternative to arterial sampling. Neuroimage. 2004;21:483-493.
13. Brankov JG, Galatsanos NP, Yang Y, Wernick MN. Segmentation of dynamic PET or fMRI images based on a similarity metric. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2003;50:1410-1414.
14. Ashburner J, Haslam J, Taylor C, Cunningham V, Jones T. A cluster analysis approach for the characterization of dynamic PET data. In: Myers R, Cunningham V, Bailey D, Jones T, eds. Quantification of Brain Function Using PET. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1996:301-306.
15. Tipping ME, Bishop CM. Mixture of probabilistic principal component analysers. Neural Comput. 1999;11:443-482.
16. Zubal IG, Harrell CR, Smith EO, Rattner Z, Gindi G, Hoffer PB. Computerized three-dimensional segmented human anatomy. Med Phys. 1994;21:299-302.
17. Maroy R, Boisgard R, Comtat C. et al. Segmentation of rodent whole-body dynamic PET images: an unsupervised method based on voxel dynamics. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2008;27:342-354.
18. Comtat C. Kinahan PE. Defrise M, Michel C, Townsend DW. Simulating whole- body PET scanning with rapid analytical methods. In: 1999 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record: 24-30 October 1999, Seattle, Washington, USA. Vol 3. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE; 2000:1260-1264.
19. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2001. NEMA standards publication NU 2-2001.
20. Huo Z, Giger ML. Evaluation of an automated segmentation method based on performances of an automated classification method. In: Lewis KL, Meerholz K, eds. Organic Photorefractives. Photoreceptors, and Nanocomposites: 31 July -I August 2000, San Diego, USA. Vol 3981. Bellingham, WA: SPIE; 2000:16-23.
21. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. JCereb Blood Flow Metab.1983;3:1-7.
22. Parker BJ, Feng D. Graph-based Mumford Shah segmentation of dynamic PET with application to input function estimation. IEEE Trans Nucl Set. 2005;52: 79-89.
23. 18F]fluorodeoxyglucose brain positron emission tomography using independent component analysis. Nucl Med Commun. 2005;26:995-1004.
24. 18F] fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography images. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:7055-7071.