Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Accuracy of amplitude-based respiratory gating for PET/CT in irregular respirations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

We evaluated the accuracy of amplitude gating PET (AG-PET) compared with phase gating PET (PG-PET) in relation to respiratory motion patterns based on a phantom analysis.

Method

We used a NEMA IEC body phantom filled with an 18F solution with a 4:1 sphere-to-background radioactivity ratio (12.6 and 2.97 kBq/mL). PET/CT scans were acquired in a motionless and moving state on a Biograph mCT. The respiratory movements were simulated by four different waveform patterns consisting of ideal breathing, breathing with a pause period, breathing with a variable amplitude and breathing with a changing baseline. AG-PET selects the narrow bandwidth containing 20 % of the respiratory cycle. PG-PET was reconstructed with five gates. The image quality was physically assessed using the percent contrast (Q H,10mm), background variability (N 10mm) recovery coefficient (RC), and sphere volumes.

Result

In regular motion patterns with ideal breathing and breathing with a pause period, the Q H,10mm, RC and sphere volumes were not different between AG-PET and PG-PET. In the variable amplitude pattern, the Q H,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (35.8 vs 28.2 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.4 vs 8.6 mL). In the changing baseline pattern, the Q H,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (42.4 vs 16.7 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.2 vs 9.8 mL). The N 10mm did not differ between AG-PET and PG-PET, irrespective of the motion pattern.

Conclusion

Amplitude gating PET is considered to be more accurate than phase gating PET for examining unstable respiratory motion patterns, such as those involving a variable amplitude or changing baseline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, et al. Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hicks RJ, Kalff V, MacManus MP, Ware RE, McKenzie AF, Matthews JP, et al. The utility of 18F-FDG PET for suspected recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after potentially curative therapy: impact on management and prognostic stratification. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1605–13.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Oyen WJ, Bussink J, Verhagen AF, Corstens FH, Bootsma GP. Role of FDG-PET in the diagnosis and management of lung cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2004;4:561–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Vansteenkiste J, Fischer BM, Dooms C, Ortensen J. Positron-emission tomography in prognostic and therapeutic assessment of lung cancer: systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5:531–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dwamena BA, Sennad SS, Angobaldo JO, Wahl RL. Metastases from non-small cell lung cancer: mediastinal staging in the 1990s-meta-analytic comparison of PET and CT. Radiology. 1999;213:530–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Eschmann SM, Friedel G, Paulsen F, Reimond M, Hehr T, Budach W, et al. Is standardised 18F-FDG uptake value an outcome predictor in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:263–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Aerts HJ, van Baardwijk AA, Petit SF, Offermann C, Loon JV, Houben R, et al. Identification of residual metabolic-active areas within individual NSCLC tumours using a pre-radiotherapy 18Fluorodeoxyglucose-PET-CT scan. Radiother Oncol. 2009;91:386–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van Baardwijk A, Bosmans G, Dekker A, van Kroonenburgh M, Boersma L, Wanders S, et al. Time trends in the maximal uptake of FDG on PET scan during thoracic radiotherapy. A prospective study in locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients. Radiother Oncol. 2007;82:145–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mawlawi O, Kappadath SC, Pan T, Rohren E, Macapinlac HA. Factors affecting quantification in PET/CT imaging. Current Med Imaging Rev. 2008;4:34–45.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Goerres GW, Kamel E, Heidelberg TN, Schwitter MR, Burger C, von Schulthess GK. PET–CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med. 2002;29:351–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cohade C, Osman M. Marshall LN, Wahl RN: PET–CT: accuracy of PET and CT spatial registration of lung lesions. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:721–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Pan T, Pevsner A, Rosenzweig KE, Mageras G, et al. The CT motion quantitation of lung lesions and its impact on PET-measured SUVs. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1287–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Squire OD, Braban LE, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on reducing lung motion artifacts in PET imaging of lung cancer. Med Phys. 2002;29:366–71.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Vines DC, Keller H, Hoisak JDP, Breen SL. Quantitative PET comparing gated with nongated acquisitions using a NEMA phantom with respiratory-simulated motion. J Nucl Med Technol. 2007;35:246–351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Didierlaurent D, Ribes S, Batatia H, Jaudet C, Dierickx LO, Zerdoud S, et al. The retrospective binning method improves the consistency of phase binning in respiratory-gated PET/CT. Phys Med Biol. 2012;57:7829–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Didierlaurent D, Ribes S, Caselles O, Jaudet C, Cazalet JM, Batatia H, et al. A new respiratory gating device to improve 4D PET/CT. Med Phys. 2013;40:032501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Park SJ, Ionascu D, Killoran J, Mamede M, Gerbaudo VH, Chin L, et al. Evaluation of the combined effects of target size, respiratory motion and background activity on 3D and 4D PET/CT images. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53:3661–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Teo BK, Saboury B, Munbodh R, Scheuermann J, Torigian DA, Zaidi H, et al. The effect of breathing irregularities on quantitative accuracy of respiratory gated PET/CT. Med Phys. 2012;39:7390–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Dawood M, Buther F, Lang N, Schober O, Schafers KP. Respiratory gating in positron emission tomography: a quantitative comparison of different gating schemes. Med Phys. 2007;34:3067–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chang G, Chang T, Clark JW Jr, Mawlawi OR. Design and performance of a respiratory amplitude gating device for PET/CT imaging. Med Phys. 2010;37:1408–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Chang G, Chang T, Pan T, Clark JW Jr, Mawlawi OR. Implementation of an automated respiratory amplitude gating technique for PET/CT: clinical evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:16–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. van Elimpt W, Hamill J, Jones J, De Ruysscher D, Lambin P, Pllers M. Optimal gating compared to 3D and 4D PET reconstruction for characterization of lung tumors. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(5):843–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jani SS, Robinson CG, Dahlobom M, White BM, Thomas DH, Gaudio S, et al. A comparison of amplitude-based and phase-based positron emission tomography gating algorithms for segmentation of internal target volumes of tumors subject to respiratory motion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;87:562–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sakaguchi Y, Mitsumoto T, Zhang T, Mitsumoto K, Tachiya Y, Ohya N, et al. Importance of gated CT acquisition for the quantitative improvement of the gated PET/CT in moving phantom. Ann Nucl Med. 2010;24:507–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Pevsner A, Nehmeh SA, Humm JL, Mageras GS, Erdi YE. Effect of motion on tracer activity determination in CT attenuation corrected PET images: a lung phantom study. Med Phys. 2005;32:2358–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Okubo M, Nishimura Y, Nakamatsu K, Okumura M, Shibata T, Kanamori S, et al. Static and moving phantom studies for radiation treatment planning in a positron emission tomography and computed tomography (PET/CT) system. Ann Nucl Med. 2008;22:579–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Killoran JH, Gerbaudo VH, Mamede M, Ionascu D, Park SJ, Berbeco R. Motion artifacts occurring at the lung/diaphragm interface using 4D CT attenuation correction of 4D PET scans. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011;12:3502.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Armstrong I, Williams HA, Matthews JC (2011) Accuracy and variability of quantitative measurements using PET with time-of-flight information and resolution modelling. In: NSS/MIC. p. 4167–70.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the staff of the Department of Clinical Radiology and Medical Technology at Kyushu University Hospital and ANZAI MEDICAL Corporation for their valuable technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Radiology, Department of Medical Technology, Kyushu University Hospital, Fukuoka, Japan

    Yuji Tsutsui, Isao Komiya & Yoshiyuki Umezu

  2. Division of Radiological Science, Department of Health Sciences, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, 3-1-1 Maidashi, Higashi-ku, Fukuoka, 812-8582, Japan

    Daisuke Kidera, Takafumi Taniguchi, Go Akamatsu & Masayuki Sasaki

  3. Department of Clinical Radiology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan

    Yoshiyuki Kitamura & Shingo Baba

Authors
  1. Yuji Tsutsui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daisuke Kidera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Takafumi Taniguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Go Akamatsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Isao Komiya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yoshiyuki Umezu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yoshiyuki Kitamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Shingo Baba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Masayuki Sasaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masayuki Sasaki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tsutsui, Y., Kidera, D., Taniguchi, T. et al. Accuracy of amplitude-based respiratory gating for PET/CT in irregular respirations. Ann Nucl Med 28, 770–779 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-014-0870-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-014-0870-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation