umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Optimization of PET reconstruction algorithm, SUV thresholding algorithm and PET acquisition time in clinical 11C-acetate PET/CT
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology.
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3731-3612
Umeå University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology.
2018 (English)In: PLoS ONE, ISSN 1932-6203, E-ISSN 1932-6203, Vol. 13, no 12, article id e0209169Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction 11C-acetate (ACE)-PET/CT is used for staging of high-risk prostate cancer. PET data is reconstructed with iterative algorithms, such as VUEPointHD ViP (VPHD) and VUEPoint HD Sharp IR (SharpIR), the latter with additional resolution recovery. It is expected that the resolution recovery algorithm should render more accurate maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) and functional tumor volumes (FTV) than the ordinary OSEM. Performing quantitative analysis, choice of volume-of-interest delineation algorithm (SUV threshold) may influence FTV. Optimizing PET acquisition time is justified if image quality and quantitation do not deteriorate. The aim of this study is to identify the optimal reconstruction algorithm, SUV threshold and acquisition time for ACE-PET/CT. Methods ACE-PET/CT data acquired with a General Electric Discovery 690 PET/CT from 16 consecutive high-risk prostate cancer patients was reconstructed with VPHD and SharpIR. Forty pelvic lymph nodes (LNs) and 14 prostate glands were delineated with 42% and estimated threshold. SUVmax, SUVmean, FTV and total lesion uptake were measured. Default acquisition time was four minutes per bed position. In a subset of lesions, acquisition times of one, two and four minutes were evaluated. Structural tumor volumes (STV) of the LNs were measured with CT for correlation with functional volumetric parameters. To validate SUV quantification under different conditions with SharpIR 42%, recovery coefficients (RCs) of SUVmean and FTV were calculated from a phantom with 18F-fluoro-deoxy-glucose (FDG)-filled volumes 0.1–9.2cm3 and signal-to-background (S/B) ratios 4.3–15.9. Results With SharpIR, SUVmax and SUVmean were higher and FTV lower compared with VPHD, regardless of threshold method, in both prostates and LNs. Total lesion uptake determined with both threshold methods was lower with SharpIR compared with VPHD with both threshold methods, except in subgroup analysis of prostate targets where estimated threshold returned higher values. Longer acquisition times returned higher FTV for both threshold methods, regardless of reconstruction algorithm. The FTV difference was most pronounced with one minute’s acquisition per bed position, which also produced visually the highest noise. SUV parameters were unaffected by varying acquisition times. FTV with SharpIR 42% showed the best correspondence with STV. SharpIR 42% gave higher RCs of SUVmean and FTV with increasing phantom size and S/B-ratio, as expected. Conclusions Delineation with SharpIR 42% seems to provide the most accurate combined information from SUVmax, SUVmean, FTV and total lesion uptake. Acquisition time may be shortened to two minutes per bed position with preserved image quality.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Public Library Science , 2018. Vol. 13, no 12, article id e0209169
National Category
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-154811DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0209169ISI: 000453247500076PubMedID: 30543705OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-154811DiVA, id: diva2:1275848
Available from: 2019-01-07 Created: 2019-01-07 Last updated: 2019-01-07Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(1000 kB)52 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 1000 kBChecksum SHA-512
e2c1a2d101b8783e32338d34c9da173478c3969a68fd14dec52940d7b22836a06fd49d0371bb57553c307964e0837e38082f644e785647cf2f763f7e1f78f737
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Strandberg, SaraAxelsson, JanRiklund, Katrine

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Strandberg, SaraAxelsson, JanRiklund, Katrine
By organisation
Diagnostic Radiology
In the same journal
PLoS ONE
Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 52 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 123 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf