Influences of point-spread function and time-of-flight reconstructions on standardized uptake value of lymph node metastases in FDG-PET

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 83, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 226-230

  Akamatsu, Go ^a,b   Mitsumoto, Katsuhiko ^a   Taniguchi, Takafumi ^a   Tsutsui, Yuji ^c   Baba, Shingo ^a   Sasaki, Masayuki ^a  

^a KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH AND INNOVATION   (Japan)

^c KYUSHU UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

FDG PET; Lymph node metastasis; Point spread function; Standardized uptake value; Time of flight

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; LIVER; LIVER INJURY; LUNG PARENCHYMA; LYMPH NODE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PET-CT SCANNER; POINT SPREAD FUNCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; TIME OF FLIGHT;

FDG-PET; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; POINT-SPREAD FUNCTION; STANDARDIZED UPTAKE VALUE; TIME-OF-FLIGHT;

ALGORITHMS; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; REFERENCE VALUES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84892365544     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: 18727727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.030     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. T.C. Kwee, S. Basu, D.A. Torigian, B. Saboury, and A. Alavi Defining the role of modern imaging techniques in assessing lymph nodes for metastasis in cancer: evolving contribution of PET in this setting Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38 2011 1353 1366
2. Y.L. Lv, D.M. Yuan, and K. Wang Diagnostic performance of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography for mediastinal lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer: a bivariate systematic review and meta-analysis J Thorac Oncol 6 2011 1350 1358
3. 131I whole body scan: a single-center study of 108 patients Ann Nucl Med 20 2006 547 552
4. E.M. Rohren, T.G. Turkington, and R.E. Coleman Clinical applications of PET in oncology Radiology 231 2004 305 332
5. 18F-FDG uptake by metastatic axillary lymph nodes on pretreatment PET/CT as a prognostic factor for recurrence in patients with invasive ductal breast cancer J Nucl Med 53 2012 1337 1344
6. B. Fischer, U. Lassen, and J. Mortensen Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT N Engl J Med 361 2009 32 39
7. 18F-FDG PET in oncology J Nucl Med 49 2008 480 508
8. 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis J Nucl Med 48 2007 1626 1632
9. R.L. Wahl, H. Jacene, Y. Kasamon, and M.A. Lodge From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors J Nucl Med 50 Suppl. 2009 122S 150S
10. W.A. Weber, V. Petersen, and B. Schmidt et al. Positron emission tomography in non-small-cell lung cancer: prediction of response to chemotherapy by quantitative assessment of glucose use J Clin Oncol 23 2003 2651 2657
11. R. Boellaard, N.C. Krak, O.S. Hoekstra, and A.A. Lammertsma Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study J Nucl Med 45 2004 1519 1527
12. H. Schöder, Y.E. Erdi, K. Chao, M. Gonen, S.M. Larson, and H.W. Yeung Clinical implications of different image reconstruction parameters for interpretation of whole-body PET studies in cancer patients J Nucl Med 45 2004 559 566
13. M.C. Adams, T.G. Turkington, J.M. Wilson, and T.Z. Wong A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements AJR Am J Roentgenol 195 2010 310 320
14. M. Soret, S.L. Bacharach, and I. Buvat Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging J Nucl Med 48 2007 932 945
15. B.W. Jakoby, Y. Bercier, M. Conti, M.E. Casey, B. Bendriem, and D.W. Townsend Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner Phys Med Biol 56 2011 2375 2389
16. V. Bettinardi, L. Presotto, E. Rapisarda, M. Picchio, L. Gianolli, and M.C. Gilardi Physical performance of the new hybrid PET/CT Discovery-690 Med Phys 38 2011 5394 5411
17. S. Surti, A. Kuhn, M.E. Werner, A.E. Perkins, J. Kolthammer, and J.S. Karp Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities J Nucl Med 48 2007 471 480
18. V.Y. Panin, F. Kehren, C. Michel, and M. Casey Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements IEEE Trans Med Imaging 25 2006 907 921
19. S. Tong, A.M. Alessio, and P.E. Kinahan Noise and signal properties in PSF-based fully 3D PET image reconstruction: an experimental evaluation Phys Med Biol 55 2010 1453 1473
20. C. Lois, B.W. Jakoby, and M.J. Long An assessment of the impact of incorporating time-of-flight information into clinical PET/CT J Nucl Med 51 2010 237 245
21. A.M. Alessio, C.W. Stearns, and S. Tong Application and evaluation of a measured spatially variant system model for PET image reconstruction IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29 2010 938 949
22. J.S. Karp, S. Surti, M.E. Daube-Witherspoon, and G. Muehllehner Benefit of time-of-flight in PET: experimental and clinical results J Nucl Med 49 2008 462 470
23. B.W. Jakoby, Y. Bercier, C.C. Watson, B. Bendriem, and D.W. Townsend Performance characteristics of a new LSO PET/CT scanner with extended axial field-of-view and PSF reconstruction IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 56 2009 633 639
24. D.J. Kadrmas, M.E. Casey, M. Conti, B.W. Jakoby, C. Lois, and D.W. Townsend Impact of time-of-flight on PET tumor detection J Nucl Med 50 2009 1315 1323
25. G. Akamatsu, K. Ishikawa, and K. Mitsumoto et al. Improvement in PET/CT image quality with a combination of point-spread function and time-of-flight in relation to reconstruction parameters J Nucl Med 53 2012 1716 1722
26. D. Groheux, M. Delord, D. Rubello, P.M. Colletti, M.L. Nquyen, and E. Hindié Variation of liver SUV on (18)FDG-PET/CT studies in women with breast cancer Clin Nucl Med 38 2013 422 425
27. H. Fukukita, M. Senda, and T. Terauchi Japanese guideline for the oncology FDG-PET/CT data acquisition protocol: synopsis of version 1.0 Ann Nucl Med 24 2010 325 334
28. 18F-FDG PET/CT standardized uptake values J Nucl Med 46 2005 424 428
29. F.L. Andersen, T.L. Klausen, A. Loft, T. Beyer, and S. Holm Clinical evaluation of PET image reconstruction using a spatial resolution model Eur J Radiol 82 2013 862 869
30. 18F-FDG PET/CT in non-small cell lung cancer Clin Nucl Med 37 2012 971 976
31. M. Conti Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38 2011 1147 1157
32. G. El Fakhri, S. Surti, C.M. Trott, J. Scheuermann, and J.S. Karp Improvement in lesion detection with whole-body oncologic time-of-flight PET J Nucl Med 52 2011 347 353