Advertisement

Annals of Nuclear Medicine

, Volume 26, Issue 7, pp 535–544 | Cite as

Head motion evaluation and correction for PET scans with 18F-FDG in the Japanese Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative (J-ADNI) multi-center study

  • Yasuhiko IkariEmail author
  • Tomoyuki Nishio
  • Yoko Makishi
  • Yukari Miya
  • Kengo Ito
  • Robert A. Koeppe
  • Michio Senda
Original article

Abstract

Objective

Head motion during 30-min (six 5-min frames) brain PET scans starting 30 min post-injection of FDG was evaluated together with the effect of post hoc motion correction between frames in J-ADNI multicenter study carried out in 24 PET centers on a total of 172 subjects consisting of 81 normal subjects, 55 mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and 36 mild Alzheimer’s disease (AD) patients.

Methods

Based on the magnitude of the between-frame co-registration parameters, the scans were classified into six levels (A–F) of motion degree. The effect of motion and its correction was evaluated using between-frame variation of the regional FDG uptake values on ROIs placed over cerebral cortical areas.

Result

Although AD patients tended to present larger motion (motion level E or F in 22 % of the subjects) than MCI (3 %) and normal (4 %) subjects, unignorable motion was observed in a small number of subjects in the latter groups as well. The between-frame coefficient of variation (SD/mean) was 0.5 % in the frontal, 0.6 % in the parietal and 1.8 % in the posterior cingulate ROI for the scans of motion level 1. The respective values were 1.5, 1.4, and 3.6 % for the scans of motion level F, but reduced by the motion correction to 0.5, 0.4 and 0.8 %, respectively. The motion correction changed the ROI value for the posterior cingulate cortex by 11.6 % in the case of severest motion.

Conclusion

Substantial head motion occurs in a fraction of subjects in a multicenter setup which includes PET centers lacking sufficient experience in imaging demented patients. A simple frame-by-frame co-registration technique that can be applied to any PET camera model is effective in correcting for motion and improving quantitative capability.

Keywords

FDG PET Motion correction J-ADNI Multicenter 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study is a part of the “Translational Research Promotion Project/Research project for the development of a systematic method for the assessment of Alzheimer’s disease,” sponsored by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) of Japan. J-ADNI is also supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Comprehensive Research on Dementia from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, as well as by the grants from J-ADNI Pharmaceutical Industry Scientific Advisory Board (ISAB) companies. The authors would also like to thank the J-ADNI Imaging ISAB and other organizations for their support of this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Thomas B, Lutz T, Ingo N, Uwe P. On the use of positioning aids to reduce misregistration in the head and neck in whole-body PET/CT studies. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(4):596–602.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Andrew JM, Kris T, Mitul AM, Federico T, Sanida M, Paul MG. Correction of head movement on PET studies: comparison of methods. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(12):1936–44.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jurgen EMM, Mark L, Floris HPV, Adriaan AL, Ronald B. Off-line motion correction methods for multi-frame PET data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36:2002–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Minoshima S, Koeppe RA, Fessler JA, Mintun MA, Berger KL, Taylor SF, et al. Integrated and automated data analysis method for neuronal activation studies using [O-15] water PET. In: Proceedings of PET 93 Akita: quantification of brain function, tracer kinetics and image analysis in brain PET. Elsevier: Amsterdam; 1993. p. 409–15.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maes F, Collignon A, Vandermeulen D, Marchal G, Sutens P. Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1997;16(2):187–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joseph AM, Paul JL, Kraft RobertA, Jonathan HB. An automated method for neuroanatomic and cytoarchitectonic atlas-based interrogation of fMRI data sets. Neuroimage. 2003;19(3):1233–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joseph AM, Paul JL, Kraft RobertA, Jonathan HB. Precentral gyrus discrepancy in electronic versions of the Talairach atlas. Neuroimage. 2004;21(1):450–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tzourio-Mazoyer N, Landeau B, Papathanassiou D, Crivello F, Etard O, Delcroix N, et al. Automated anatomical labelling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single subject brain. NeuroImage. 2002;15:273–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Minoshima S, Frey KA, Koeppe RA, Foster NL, Kuhl DE. A diagnostic approach in Alzheimer’s disease using three-dimensional stereotactic surface projections of [18F]FDG. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1238–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2006.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat. 1979;6:65–70.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kendall MG. A new measure of rank correlation. Biometrika. 1938;30(1/2):81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasuhiko Ikari
    • 1
    • 4
    • 6
    Email author
  • Tomoyuki Nishio
    • 1
    • 4
    • 6
  • Yoko Makishi
    • 1
    • 4
    • 6
  • Yukari Miya
    • 1
    • 4
    • 6
  • Kengo Ito
    • 2
    • 5
  • Robert A. Koeppe
    • 3
  • Michio Senda
    • 1
    • 6
  1. 1.Institute of Biomedical Research and InnovationKobeJapan
  2. 2.National Center for Geriatrics and GerontologyObuJapan
  3. 3.University of Michigan Health SystemAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Research Association for BiotechnologyTokyoJapan
  5. 5.J-ADNI PET coreObuJapan
  6. 6.J-ADNI PET QC coreKobeJapan

Personalised recommendations