Verification of image quality and quantification in whole-body positron emission tomography with continuous bed motion
- 29 Downloads
Whole-body dynamic imaging using positron emission tomography (PET) facilitates the quantification of tracer kinetics. It is potentially valuable for the differential diagnosis of tumors and for the evaluation of therapeutic efficacy. In whole-body dynamic PET with continuous bed motion (CBM) (WBDCBM-PET), the pass number and bed velocity are key considerations. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the effect of a combination of pass number and bed velocity on the quantitative accuracy and quality of WBDCBM-PET images.
In this study, WBDCBM-PET imaging was performed at a body phantom using seven bed velocity settings in combination with pass numbers. The resulting image quality was evaluated. For comparing different acquisition settings, the dynamic index (DI) was obtained using the following formula: [P/S], where P represents the pass number, and S represents the bed velocity (mm/s). The following physical parameters were evaluated: noise equivalent count at phantom (NECphantom), percent background variability (N10 mm), percent contrast of the 10 mm hot sphere (QH, 10 mm), the QH, 10 mm/N10 mm ratio, and the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax). Furthermore, visual evaluation was performed.
The NECphantom was equivalent for the same DI settings regardless of the bed velocity. The N10 mm exhibited an inverse correlation (r < − 0.89) with the DI. QH,10 mm was not affected by DI, and a correlation between QH,10 mm/N10 mm ratio and DI was found at all the velocities (r > 0.93). The SUVmax of the spheres was not influenced by the DI. The coefficient of variations caused by bed velocity decreased in larger spheres. There was no significant difference between the bed velocities on visual evaluation.
The quantitative accuracy and image quality achieved with WBDCBM-PET was comparable to that achieved with non-dynamic CBM, regardless of the pass number and bed velocity used during imaging for a given acquisition time.
KeywordsDynamic PET Continuous bed motion Quantity Whole-body
A part of this study was presented at the Annual Meeting of SNMMI in Philadelphia, USA, Jun 23, 2018. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. This study received no funding.
Compliance with ethical standatds
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 7.Osborne DR, Acuff S, Cruise S, Syed M, Neveu M, Stuckey A, et al. Quantitative and qualitative comparison of continuous bed motion and traditional step and shoot PET/CT. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015;5:56–64.Google Scholar
- 11.Yamashita S, Yamamoto H, Nakaichi T, Yoneyama T, Yokoyama K. Comparison of image quality between step-and-shoot and continuous bed motion techniques in whole-body (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with the same acquisition duration. Ann Nucl Med. 2017;31:686–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Burger IA, Vargas HA, Apte A, Beattie BJ, Humm JL, Gonen M, et al. PET quantification with a histogram derived total activity metric: superior quantitative consistency compared to total lesion glycolysis with absolute or relative SUV thresholds in phantoms and lung cancer patients. Nucl Med Biol. 2014;41:410–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar