Patient weight-based acquisition protocols to optimize18F-FDG PET/CT image quality

Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology

Volumn 39, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 72-76

  Nagaki, Akio ^a,b   Onoguchi, Masahisa ^b   Matsutomo, Norikazu ^a  

^a KURASHIKI CENTRAL HOSPITAL   (Japan)

^b KANAZAWA UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

18F FDG; Acquisition protocols; Image quality; Patient weight; PET CT

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; LUTETIUM; LUTETIUM OXYORTHOSILICATE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BODY WEIGHT; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COEFFICIENT OF VARIANCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NOISE EQUIVALENT COUNTING RATE; OBESITY; RATING SCALE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; STATISTICAL PARAMETERS; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING;

BODY WEIGHT; FEMALE; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGING, THREE-DIMENSIONAL; LUTETIUM; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; QUALITY CONTROL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SILICATES; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 79958232400     PISSN: 00914916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnmt.110.081661     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, et al. Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480-508.
2. Halpern BS, Dahlbom M, Quon A, et al. Impact of patient weight and emission scan duration on PET/CT image quality and lesion detectability. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:797-801.
3. Halpern BS, Dahlbom M, Auerbach MA, et al. Optimizing imaging protocols for overweight and obese patients: a lutetium orthosilicate PET/CT study. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:603-607.
4. Everaert H, Vanhove C, Lahoutte T, et al. Optimal dose of 18F-FDG required for whole-body PET using an LSO PET camera. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:1615-1619.
5. 18F-FDG PET/CT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:885-895.
6. Zanzonico P. Positron emission tomography. a review of basic principles, scanner design and performance, and current systems. Semin Nucl Med. 2004;34:87-111.
7. Townsend DW. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38:152-166.
8. Watson CC, Casey ME, Bendriem B, et al. Optimizing injected dose in clinical PET by accurately modeling the counting-rate response functions specific to individual patient scans. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1825-1834.
9. Brambilla M, Secco C, Dominietto M, Matheoud R, Sacchetti G, Inglese E. Performance characteristics obtained for a new 3-dimensional lutetium oxyorthosilicate-based whole-body PET/CT scanner with the national electrical manufacturers association NU 2-2001 standard. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:2083-2091.
10. Masuda Y, Kondo C, Matsuo Y, Uetani M, Kusakabe K. Comparison of imaging protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in overweight patients: optimizing scan duration versus administered dose. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:844-848.
11. Tatsumi M, Clark PA, Nakamoto Y, Wahl RL. Impact of body habitus on quantitative and qualitative image quality in whole-body FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:40-45.