Nonrigid versus rigid registration of thoracic 18F-FDG PET and CT in patients with lung cancer: An intraindividual comparison of different breathing maneuvers

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 50, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1921-1926

  Grgic, Aleksandar ^a   Nestle, Ursula ^a,b   Schaefer Schuler, Andrea ^a   Kremp, Stephanie ^a   Ballek, Elena ^a   Fleckenstein, Jochen ^a   Rübe, Christian ^a   Kirsch, Carl Martin ^a   Hellwig, Dirk ^a  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Computer assisted image analysis; Image registration; Non small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC); Positron emission tomography; Spiral computed tomography

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; AGED; AORTA ARCH; ARTICLE; BREATH HOLDING; BREATHING MECHANICS; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SCINTISCANNING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FORCED EXPIRATION; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; INSPIRATORY CAPACITY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LUNG SCINTISCANNING; MALE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ALGORITHM; BREATHING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; IMAGE PROCESSING; LUNG TUMOR; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTISCANNING; THORAX; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHY, THORACIC; RESPIRATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; THORAX; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 73349084651     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.065649     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Jemal A, Thun MJ, Ries LA, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2005, featuring trends in lung cancer, tobacco use, and tobacco control. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1672-1694.
2. Bilfinger TV. Surgical viewpoints for the definitive treatment of lung cancer. Respir Care Clin N Am. 2003;9:141-162.
3. Hellwig D, Baum RP, Kirsch C. FDG-PET, PET/CT and conventional nuclear medicine procedures in the evaluation of lung cancer: a systematic review. Nuklearmedizin. 2009;48:59-69.
4. Ukena D, Hellwig D. Value of FDG PET in the management of NSCLC. Lung Cancer. 2004;45 (suppl 2):S75-S78.
5. Halpern BS, Schiepers C, Weber WA, et al. Presurgical staging of non-small cell lung cancer: positron emission tomography, integrated positron emission tomography/CT, and software image fusion. Chest. 2005;128:2289-2297.
6. 18F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D- glucose-positron emission tomography and computed tomography registration. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2003;27:479-484.
7. Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369-1379.
8. Beyer T, Antoch G, Blodgett T, Freudenberg LF, Akhurst T, Mueller S. 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.
9. Gould KL, Pan T, Loghin C, Johnson NP, Guha A, Sdringola S. Frequent diagnostic errors in cardiac PET/CT due to misregistration of CT attenuation and emission PET images: a definitive analysis of causes, consequences, and corrections. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1112-1121.
10. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on quantifying PET images of lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:876-881.
11. Schaefer A, Kremp S, Hellwig D, Rube C, Kirsch CM, Nestle U. A contrast-oriented algorithm for FDG-PET-based delineation of tumour volumes for the radiotherapy of lung cancer: derivation from phantom measurements and validation in patient data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35:1989-1999.
12. Goerres GW, Kamel E, Heidelberg TN, Schwitter MR, Burger C, von Schulthess GK. PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:351-360.
13. Gilman MD, Fischman AJ, Krishnasetty V, Halpern EF, Aquino SL. Optimal CT breathing protocol for combined thoracic PET/CT. AJR. 2006;187:1357-1360.
14. Grgic A, Nestle U, Schaefer-Schuler A, Kremp S, Kirsch CM, Hellwig D. FDG-PET-based radiotherapy planning in lung cancer: optimum breathing protocol and patient positioning - an intraindividual comparison. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;73:103-111.
15. Gilman MD, Fischman AJ, Krishnasetty V, Halpern EF, Aquino SL. Hybrid PET/CT of the thorax: when is computer registration necessary? J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2007;31:395-401.
16. Weigert M, Pietrzyk U, Muller S, Palm C, Beyer T. Whole-body PET/CT imaging: combining software- and hardware-based co-registration. Z Med Phys. 2008;18:59-66.
17. Krishnasetty V, Fischman AJ, Halpern EL, Aquino SL. Comparison of alignment of computer-registered data sets: combined PET/CT versus independent PET and CT of the thorax. Radiology. 2005;237:635-639.
18. Lamare F, Cresson T, Savean J, Cheze Le Rest C, Reader AJ, Visvikis D. Respiratory motion correction for PET oncology applications using affine transformation of list mode data. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:121-140.
19. 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.
20. 18F-FDG whole-body PET with CT. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1156-1167.
21. Bridges RL. Software fusion: an option never fully explored. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:834-836.
22. Wolz G, Nomayr A, Hothorn T, et al. Anatomical accuracy of interactive and automated rigid registration between x-ray CT and FDG-PET. Nuklearmedizin. 2007;46:43-48.
23. Fitton I, Steenbakkers RJ, Gilhuijs K, et al. Impact of anatomical location on value of CT-PET co-registration for delineation of lung tumors. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;70:1403-1407.
24. Fleiss J. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Wiley; 1981.
25. Pelizzari CA, Chen GT, Spelbring DR, Weichselbaum RR, Chen CT. Accurate three-dimensional registration of CT, PET, and/or MR images of the brain. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1989;13:20-26.
26. Pietrzyk U. Does PET/CT render software registration obsolete? Nuklearmedizin. 2005;44(suppl 1):S13-S17.
27. Wolz G, Nömayr A, Hothorn T, et al. Comparison of performance between rigid and non-rigid software registering CT to FDG-PET. Int J CARS. 2007;2:183-190.
28. Moreno A, Chambon S, Santhanam AP. Combining a breathing model and tumor-specific rigidity constraints for registration of CT-PET thoracic data. Comput Aided Surg. 2008;13:281-298.
29. West J, Fitzpatrick JM, Wang MY, et al. Comparison and evaluation of retrospective intermodality brain image registration techniques. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1997;21:554-566.
30. Ireland RH, Dyker KE, Barber DC, et al. Nonrigid image registration for head and neck cancer radiotherapy treatment planning with PET/CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;68:952-957.