Advertisement

European Radiology

, Volume 15, Issue 7, pp 1456–1462 | Cite as

Value of image fusion using single photon emission computed tomography with integrated low dose computed tomography in comparison with a retrospective voxel-based method in neuroendocrine tumours

  • H. Amthauer
  • T. Denecke
  • T. Rohlfing
  • J. Ruf
  • M. Böhmig
  • M. Gutberlet
  • U. Plöckinger
  • R. Felix
  • A. J. Lemke
Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

The objective was the evaluation of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) with integrated low dose computed tomography (CT) in comparison with a retrospective fusion of SPECT and high-resolution CT and a side-by-side analysis for lesion localisation in patients with neuroendocrine tumours. Twenty-seven patients were examined by multidetector CT. Additionally, as part of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS), an integrated SPECT–CT was performed. SPECT and CT data were fused using software with a registration algorithm based on normalised mutual information. The reliability of the topographic assignment of lesions in SPECT–CT, retrospective fusion and side-by-side analysis was evaluated by two blinded readers. Two patients were not enrolled in the final analysis because of misregistrations in the retrospective fusion. Eighty-seven foci were included in the analysis. For the anatomical assignment of foci, SPECT–CT and retrospective fusion revealed overall accuracies of 91 and 94% (side-by-side analysis 86%). The correct identification of foci as lymph node manifestations (n=25) was more accurate by retrospective fusion (88%) than from SPECT–CT images (76%) or by side-by-side analysis (60%). Both modalities of image fusion appear to be well suited for the localisation of SRS foci and are superior to side-by-side analysis of non-fused images especially concerning lymph node manifestations.

Keywords

Image fusion Single photon emission computed tomography Computed tomography Neuroendocrine tumour Somatostatine receptor scintigraphy 

References

  1. 1.
    Krenning EP, Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Breeman WA, Kooij PP, Oei HY, van Hagen M, Postema PT, de Jong M, Reubi JC et al (1993) Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with [111In-DTPA-d-Phe1]- and [123I-Tyr3]-octreotide: the Rotterdam experience with more than 1,000 patients. Eur J Nucl Med 20(8):716–731PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lebtahi R, Cadiot G, Sarda L, Daou D, Faraggi M, Petegnief Y, Mignon M, le Guludec D (1997) Clinical impact of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in the management of patients with neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors. J Nucl Med 38(6):853–858PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chiti A, Briganti V, Fanti S, Monetti N, Masi R, Bombardieri E (2000) Results and potential of somatostatin receptor imaging in gastroenteropancreatic tract tumours. Q J Nucl Med 44(1):42–49Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ricke J, Klose KJ, Mignon M, Oberg K, Wiedenmann B (2001) Standardisation of imaging in neuroendocrine tumours: results of a European delphi process. Eur J Radiol 37(1):8–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schillaci O, Scopinaro F, Danieli R, Angeletti S, Tavolaro R, Annibale B, Cannas P, Marignani M, Colella AC, Delle Fave G (1997) Single photon emission computerized tomography increases the sensitivity of indium-111-pentetreotide scintigraphy in detecting abdominal carcinoids. Anticancer Res 17(3B):1753–1756Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Schillaci O, Spanu A, Scopinaro F, Falchi A, Danieli R, Marongiu P, Pisu N, Madeddu G, Delle Fave G, Madeddu G (2003) Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in liver metastasis detection from gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med 44(3):359–368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gotthardt M, Dirkmorfeld LM, Wied MU, Rinke A, Behe MP, Schlieck A, Hoffken H, Alfke H, Joseph K, Klose KJ, Behr TM, Arnold R (2003) Influence of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT/MRI on the clinical management of patients with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: an analysis in 188 patients. Digestion 68(2–3):80–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chiti A, Fanti S, Savelli G, Romeo A, Bellanova B, Rodari M, van Graafeiland BJ, Monetti N, Bombardieri E (1998) Comparison of somatostatin receptor imaging, computed tomography and ultrasound in the clinical management of neuroendocrine gastro-entero-pancreatic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 25(10):1396–1403CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Amthauer H, Ruf J, Bohmig M, Lopez-Hanninen E, Rohlfing T, Wernecke KD, Plockinger U, Gutberlet M, Lemke AJ, Steinmuller T, Wiedenmann B, Felix R (2004) Diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumours by retrospective image fusion: is there a benefit? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31(3):342–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    West JB, Fitzpatrick JM, Wang MY, Dawant BM, Maurer CR, Kessler RM, Maciunas RJ (1999) Retrospective intermodality registration techniques for images of the head: surface-based versus volume-based. IEEE Trans Med Imag 18(2):144–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tomura N, Watanabe O, Omachi K, Sakuma I, Takahashi S, Otani T, Kidani H, Watarai J (2004) Image fusion of thallium-201 SPECT and MR imaging for the assessment of recurrent head and neck tumors following flap reconstructive surgery. Eur Radiol 14(7):1249–1254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lemke AJ, Niehues SM, Hosten N, Amthauer H, Boehmig M, Stroszczynski C, Rohlfing T, Rosewicz S, Felix R (2004) Retrospective digital image fusion of multidetector CT and 18F-FDG PET: clinical value in pancreatic lesions—a prospective study with 104 patients. J Nucl Med 45(8):1279–1286Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bocher M, Balan A, Krausz Y, Shrem Y, Lonn A, Wilk M, Chisin R (2000) Gamma camera-mounted anatomical X-ray tomography: technology, system characteristics and first images. Eur J Nucl Med 27(6):619–627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Even-Sapir E, Keidar Z, Sachs J, Engel A, Bettman L, Gaitini D, Guralnik L, Werbin N, Iosilevsky G, Israel O (2001) The new technology of combined transmission and emission tomography in evaluation of endocrine neoplasms. J Nucl Med 42(7):998–1004Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hosten N, Kreissig R, Puls R, Amthauer H, Beier J, Rohlfing T, Stroszczynski C, Herbel A, Lemke AJ, Felix R (2000) Fusion of CT and PET data: methods and clinical relevance for planning laser-induced thermotherapy of liver metastases. Rofo 172(7):630–635Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Krausz Y, Keidar Z, Kogan I, Even-Sapir E, Bar-Shalom R, Engel A, Rubinstein R, Sachs J, Bocher M, Agranovicz S, Chisin R, Israel O (2003) SPECT/CT hybrid imaging with 111In-pentetreotide in assessment of neuroendocrine tumours. Clin Endocrinol 59(5):565–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schillaci O, Danieli R, Manni C, Simonetti G (2004) Is SPECT/CT with a hybrid camera useful to improve scintigraphic imaging interpretation? Nucl Med Commun 25(7):705–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Israel O, Keidar Z, Iosilevsky G, Bettman L, Sachs J, Frenkel A (2001) The fusion of anatomic and physiologic imaging in the management of patients with cancer. Semin Nucl Med 31:191–205Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slomka PJ, Dey D, Przetak C, Aladl UE, Baum RP (2003) Automated 3-dimensional registration of stand-alone (18)F-FDG whole-body PET with CT. J Nucl Med 44(7):1156–1167Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Patton JA, Delbeke D, Sandler MP (2000) Image fusion using an integrated, dual-head coincidence camera with x-ray tube-based attenuation maps. J Nucl Med 41:1364–1368Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Goerres GW, Burger C, Schwitter MW, Heidelberg TN, Seifert B, Von Schulthess GW (2003) PET/CT of the abdomen: optimizing the patient breathing pattern. Eur Radiol 13(4):734–739CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Amthauer
    • 1
  • T. Denecke
    • 1
  • T. Rohlfing
    • 2
  • J. Ruf
    • 1
  • M. Böhmig
    • 3
  • M. Gutberlet
    • 1
  • U. Plöckinger
    • 3
  • R. Felix
    • 1
  • A. J. Lemke
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik für Strahlenheilkunde, Campus Virchow-KlinikumCharité-Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Department of Neurosurgery, Image Guidance LaboratoriesStanford UniversityStanfordUSA
  3. 3.Medizinische Klinik m.S. Hepatologie und Gastroenterologie, Interdisziplinäres Stoffwechsel-Centrum, Campus Virchow-KlinikumCharité-Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations