Impact of Tissue Classification in MRI-Guided Attenuation Correction on Whole-Body Patlak PET/MRI
- 27 Downloads
The aim of this work is to investigate the impact of tissue classification in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided positron emission tomography (PET) attenuation correction (AC) for whole-body (WB) Patlak net uptake rate constant (Ki) imaging in PET/MRI studies.
WB dynamic PET/CT data were acquired for 14 patients. The CT images were utilized to generate attenuation maps (μ-mapCTAC) of continuous attenuation coefficient values (Acoeff). The μ-mapCTAC were then segmented into four tissue classes (μ-map4-classes), namely background (air), lung, fat, and soft tissue, where a predefined Acoeff was assigned to each class. To assess the impact of bone for AC, the bones in the μ-mapCTAC were then assigned a predefined soft tissue Acoeff (0.1 cm−1) to produce an AC μ-map without bones (μ-mapno-bones). Thereafter, both WB static SUV and dynamic PET images were reconstructed using μ-mapCTAC, μ-map4-classes, and μ-mapno-bones (PETCTAC, PET4-classes, and PETno-bones), respectively. WB indirect and direct parametric Ki images were generated using Patlak graphical analysis. Malignant lesions were delineated on PET images with an automatic segmentation method that uses an active contour model (MASAC). Then, the quantitative metrics of the metabolically active tumor volume (MATV), target-to-background (TBR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), peak region-of-interest (ROIpeak), maximum region-of-interest (ROImax), mean region-of-interest (ROImean), and metabolic volume product (MVP) were analyzed. The Wilcoxon test was conducted to assess the difference between PET4-classes and PETno-bones against PETCTAC for all images. The same test was also adopted to compare the differences between SUV, indirect Ki, and direct Ki images for each evaluated AC method.
No significant differences in MATV, TBR, and CNR were observed between PET4-classes and PETCTAC for either SUV or Ki images. PET4-classes significantly overestimated ROIpeak, ROImax, ROImean, as well as MVP scores compared with PETCTAC in both SUV and Ki images. SUV images exhibited the highest median relative errors for PET4-classes with respect to PETCTAC (RE4-classes): 6.91 %, 6.55 %, 5.90 %, and 6.56 % for ROIpeak, ROImax, ROImean, and MVP, respectively. On the contrary, Ki images showed slightly reduced RE4-classes (indirect 5.52 %, 5.95 %, 4.43 %, and 5.70 %, direct 6.61 %, 6.33 %, 5.53 %, and 4.96 %) for ROIpeak, ROImax, ROImean, and MVP, respectively. A higher TBR was observed on indirect and direct Ki images relative to SUV, while direct Ki images demonstrated the highest CNR.
Four-tissue class AC may impact SUV and Ki parameter estimation but only to a limited extent, thereby suggesting that WB Patlak Ki imaging for dynamic WB PET/MRI studies is feasible. Patlak Ki imaging can enhance TBR, thereby facilitating lesion segmentation and quantification. However, patient-specific Acoeff for each tissue class should be used when possible to address the high inter-patient variability of Acoeff distributions.
Key wordsWhole-body PET/MRI SUV Patlak analysis Tissue classification Attenuation correction
The authors would like to thank Prof. Ronald Boellaard, Prof. Qingchun Qiu, and Zemian Chen for their assistance.
This work was supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant no. SNSF 320030_176052 and the Swiss Cancer Research Foundation under Grant KFS-3855-02-2016.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
The study was approved by the local ethics committee.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Becker M, Varoquaux AD, Combescure C, Rager O, Pusztaszeri M, Burkhardt K, Delattre BMA, Dulguerov P, Dulguerov N, Katirtzidou E, Caparrotti F, Ratib O, Zaidi H, Becker CD (2018) Local recurrence of squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck after radio(chemo)therapy: diagnostic performance of FDG-PET/MRI with diffusion-weighted sequences. Eur Radiol 28:651–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Burgos N, Cardoso MJ, Thielemans K, Modat M, Dickson J, Schott JM, Atkinson D, Arridge SR, Hutton BF, Ourselin S (2015) Multi-contrast attenuation map synthesis for PET/MR scanners: assessment on FDG and Florbetapir PET tracers. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:1447–1458CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 21.Zhuang M, Karakatsanis NA, Dierckx R, Zaidi H (2019) Quantitative analysis of heterogeneous 18F-FDG static (SUV) vs. Patlak (Ki) whole-body PET imaging using different segmentation methods: a simulation study. Mol Imaging Biol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-018-1241-8
- 22.Rahmim A, Lodge MA, Karakatsanis NA et al (2019) Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: principles, potentials and applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-018-4153-6
- 23.Fahrni G, Karakatsanis N, Di Domenicantonio G, Garibotto V, Zaidi H (2019) Does whole-body Patlak 18F-FDG PET imaging improve lesion detectability in clinical oncology? Eur Radiol https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5966-1
- 27.Karakatsanis NA, Mehranian A, Casey ME, Zaidi H (2016) Direct 4D slice-wise whole-body parametric PET image reconstruction for continuous bed motion acquisitions. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium & Medical Imaging Conference, Strasbourg, France, 29 October – 6 November 2016, pp 1–6Google Scholar
- 32.Karakatsanis N, Tsoumpas C, Zaidi H (2015) The impact of MR-guided PET attenuation correction on whole-body dynamic and parametric PET imaging [abstract]. J Nucl Med 56:1796Google Scholar
- 36.Schulz V, Torres-Espallardo I, Renisch S, Hu Z, Ojha N, Börnert P, Perkuhn M, Niendorf T, Schäfer WM, Brockmann H, Krohn T, Buhl A, Günther RW, Mottaghy FM, Krombach GA (2011) Automatic, three-segment, MR-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MR data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:138–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Berker Y, Franke J, Salomon A, Palmowski M, Donker HCW, Temur Y, Mottaghy FM, Kuhl C, Izquierdo-Garcia D, Fayad ZA, Kiessling F, Schulz V (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 53:796–804CrossRefGoogle Scholar