Advertisement

Image artifacts from MR-based attenuation correction in clinical, whole-body PET/MRI

  • Sune H. KellerEmail author
  • Søren Holm
  • Adam E. Hansen
  • Bernhard Sattler
  • Flemming Andersen
  • Thomas L. Klausen
  • Liselotte Højgaard
  • Andreas Kjær
  • Thomas Beyer
Short Communication

Abstract

Purpose

Integrated whole-body PET/MRI tomographs have become available. PET/MR imaging has the potential to supplement, or even replace combined PET/CT imaging in selected clinical indications. However, this is true only if methodological pitfalls and image artifacts arising from novel MR-based attenuation correction (MR-AC) are fully understood.

Results

Here we present PET/MR image artifacts following routine MR-AC, as most frequently observed in clinical operations of an integrated whole-body PET/MRI system.

Conclusion

A clinical adoption of integrated PET/MRI should entail the joint image display and interpretation of MR data, MR-based attenuation maps and uncorrected plus attenuation-corrected PET images in order to recognize potential pitfalls from MR-AC and to ensure clinically accurate image interpretation.

Keywords

PET/MRI MR-based attenuation correction Image artifacts Pitfalls 

References

  1. 1.
    Wernick MN, Aarsvold JN (2004) Emission tomography. The Fundamentals of SPECT and PET. Academic Press, ISBN: 978-0127 444 826Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailey DL, Townsend DW, Valk PE and Maisey MN (2005) Positron emission tomography: basic science and clinical practice. Springer, London, ISBN: 978-1852 334 857Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, Phelps ME, Kuhl DE (1979) Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 2. Effects of inaccurate attenuation correction. J Comput Assist Tomogr 3:804–814PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Townsend DW (2008) Multimodality imaging of structure and function. Phys Med Biol 53:R1–R39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T et al (2000) A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med 41:1369–1379PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR (2007) Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nucl Med 48:78S–88SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    von Schulthess GK (2000) Cost considerations regarding an integrated CT-PET system. Eur Radiol 10:S377–S380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kinahan PE, Hasegawa BH, Beyer T (2003) X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanners. Semin Nucl Med 33:166–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beyer T, Antoch G, Müller S et al (2004) Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med 45:25S–35SPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pichler BJ, Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS (2008) Latest advances in molecular imaging instrumentation. J Nucl Med 49:5S–23SPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Beyer T, Freudenberg LS, Czernin J, Townsend DW (2011) The future of hybrid imaging-part 3: PET/MR, small-animal imaging and beyond. Insights Imaging 2:235–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kalemis A, Delattre BM, Heinzer S (2012) Sequential whole-body PET/MR scanner—concept, clinical use and optimisations after two years in the clinic. The manufacturer’s perspective. Magn Reson Mater Phy (Epub ahead of print Aug 7)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B et al (2011) Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med 52:1914–1922PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hofmann M, Bezrukov I, Mantlik F et al (2011) MRI-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MRI: quantitative evaluation of segmentation- and atlas-based methods. J Nucl Med 52:1392–1399PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schulz V, Torres-Espallardo I, Renisch S et al (2010) Automatic, three-segment, MR-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MR data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:138–152PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Martinez-Möller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G et al (2009) Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med 50:520–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sattler B, Jochimsen T, Barthel H et al (2012) Physical and organizational provision for installation, regulatory requirements and implementation of a simultaneous hybrid PET/MR-imaging system in an integrated research and clinical setting. Magn Reson Mater Phy (paper included in this issue)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Keereman V, Mollet P, Berker Y, Schulz V, Vandenberghe S et al (2012) Challenges and current methods for attenuation correction in PET-MR. Magn Reson Mater Phy (paper included in this issue)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Delso G, Martinez-Möller A, Bundschuh RA, Nekolla SG, Ziegler SI (2010) The effect of limited MR field of view in MR/PET attenuation correction. Med Phys 37:2804–2812PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nuyts J, Dupont P, Stroobants S, Benninck R, Mortelmans L, Suetens P (1999) Simultaneous maximum a posteriori reconstruction of attenuation and activity distributions from emission sinograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 18:393–403PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Eiber M, Martinez-Möller A, Souvatzoglou M et al (2011) Value of a Dixon-based MR/PET attenuation correction sequence for the localization and evaluation of PET-positive lesions. Eur J Nuc Med Mol Imaging 38:1691–1701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guérin B, Cho S, Chun SY et al (2011) Nonrigid PET motion compensation in the lower abdomen using simultaneous tagged-MRI and PET imaging. Med Phys 38:3025–3038PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keereman V, Holen RV, Mollet P, Vandenberghe S et al (2011) The effect of errors in segmented attenuation maps on PET quantification. Med Phys 38:6010–6019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Samarin A, Burger C, Wollenweber SD et al (2012) PET/MR imaging of bone lesions—implications for PET quantification from imperfect attenuation correction. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 39:1154–1160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Larsson A et al (2012) Evaluation of an attenuation correction method for brain PET/MRI based on substitute CT-imag. Magn Reson Mater Phy (paper included in this issue)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Berker Y, Franke J, Salomon A (2012) MRI-based attenuation correction for hybrid PET/MRI systems: a 4-class tissue segmentation technique using a combined ultrashort-echo-time/Dixon MRI sequence. J Nucl Med 53:796–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ESMRMB 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sune H. Keller
    • 1
    Email author
  • Søren Holm
    • 1
  • Adam E. Hansen
    • 1
  • Bernhard Sattler
    • 2
  • Flemming Andersen
    • 1
  • Thomas L. Klausen
    • 1
  • Liselotte Højgaard
    • 1
  • Andreas Kjær
    • 1
  • Thomas Beyer
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine and PET, RigshospitaletCopenhagen University HospitalCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear MedicineUniversity Hospital LeipzigLeipzigGermany
  3. 3.cmi-experts GmbHZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations