Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sources of Artefacts: Consequences and Solutions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
PET/CT in Radiotherapy Planning

Part of the book series: Clinicians’ Guides to Radionuclide Hybrid Imaging ((PET/CT))

  • 920 Accesses

Abstract

While PET shows much promise in improving target delineation in radiotherapy planning, there are some pitfalls which must be acknowledged before adopting wholescale implementation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Antoch G, Freudenberg LS, Egelhof T, Stattaus J, Jentzen W, Debatin JF, et al. Focal tracer uptake: a potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(10):1339–42.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Yau YY, Chan WS, Tam YM, Vernon P, Wong S, Coel M, et al. Application of intravenous contrast in PET/CT: does it really introduce significant attenuation correction error? Journal of nuclear medicine: official publication. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(2):283–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Goerres GW, Hany TF, Kamel E, von Schulthess GK, Buck A. Head and neck imaging with PET and PET/CT: artefacts from dental metallic implants. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29(3):367–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilson JM, Partridge M, Hawkins M. The application of functional imaging techniques to personalise chemoradiotherapy in upper gastrointestinal malignancies. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26(9):581–96.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwarzenbock S, Souvatzoglou M, Krause BJ. Choline PET and PET/CT in primary diagnosis and staging of prostate cancer. Theranostics. 2012;2(3):318–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Weigert M, Pietrzyk U, Muller S, Palm C, Beyer T. Whole-body PET/CT imaging: combining software- and hardware-based co-registration. Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik. 2008;18(1):59–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Goerres GW, Kamel E, Seifert B, Burger C, Buck A, Hany TF, et al. Accuracy of image coregistration of pulmonary lesions in patients with non-small cell lung cancer using an integrated PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(11):1469–75.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nakamoto Y, Tatsumi M, Cohade C, Osman M, Marshall LT, Wahl RL. Accuracy of image fusion of normal upper abdominal organs visualized with PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(4):597–602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cohade C, Osman M, Marshall LN, Wahl RN. PET/CT: accuracy of PET and CT spatial registration of lung lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30(5):721–6.

    Google Scholar 

  10. 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(3):351–60.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Osman MM, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Marshall LT, Leal JP, Wahl RL. Clinically significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET/CT: frequency in 300 patients. J Nucl Med. 2003;44(2):240–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Goerres GW, Burger C, Kamel E, Seifert B, Kaim AH, Buck A, et al. Respiration-induced attenuation artifact at PET/CT: technical considerations. Radiology. 2003;226(3):906–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Pan T, Pevsner A, Rosenzweig KE, Mageras G, et al. The CT motion quantitation of lung lesions and its impact on PET-measured SUVs. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(8):1287–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. de Juan R, Seifert B, Berthold T, von Schulthess GK, Goerres GW. Clinical evaluation of a breathing protocol for PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2004;14(6):1118–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Meirelles GS, Squire O, Larson SM, Humm JL, et al. Deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT of the thorax. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(1):22–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and the Institute of Cancer Research, London, SW3 6JJ, UK

    Alison Tree

  2. CRUK MRC Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Gray Laboratories, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX3 7DQ, UK

    Maria Hawkins

Authors
  1. Alison Tree
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Hawkins
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alison Tree .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine and PET, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, Sutton, Surrey, United Kingdom

    Sue Chua

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tree, A., Hawkins, M. (2017). Sources of Artefacts: Consequences and Solutions. In: Chua, S. (eds) PET/CT in Radiotherapy Planning . Clinicians’ Guides to Radionuclide Hybrid Imaging(). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54744-2_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54744-2_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-54743-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-54744-2

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation