Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Pediatric Radiology
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 7/2013

Open Access 01-07-2013 | Technical Innovation

PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner

Authors: Franz Wolfgang Hirsch, Bernhard Sattler, Ina Sorge, Lars Kurch, Adrian Viehweger, Lutz Ritter, Peter Werner, Thies Jochimsen, Henryk Barthel, Uta Bierbach, Holger Till, Osama Sabri, Regine Kluge

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 7/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Use of PET/MR in children has not previously been reported, to the best of our knowledge. Children with systemic malignancies may benefit from the reduced radiation exposure offered by PET/MR. We report our initial experience with PET/MR hybrid imaging and our current established sequence protocol after 21 PET/MR studies in 15 children with multifocal malignant diseases. The effective dose of a PET/MR scan was only about 20% that of the equivalent PET/CT examination. Simultaneous acquisition of PET and MR data combines the advantages of the two previously separate modalities. Furthermore, the technique also enables whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and statements to be made about the biological cellularity and nuclear/cytoplasmic ratio of tumours. Combined PET/MR saves time and resources. One disadvantage of PET/MR is that in order to have an effect, a significantly longer examination time is needed than with PET/CT. In our initial experience, PET/MR has turned out to be an unexpectedly stable and reliable hybrid imaging modality, which generates a complementary diagnostic study of great additional value.
Literature
1.
Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS, Wiehr S et al (2009) Pre-clinical PET/MR: technological advances and new perspectives in biomedical research. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36(Suppl 1):56–68CrossRef
2.
Sauter AW, Wehrl HF, Kolb A et al (2010) Combined PET/MR: one step further in multimodality imaging. Trends Mol Med 16:508–515PubMedCrossRef
3.
4.
Brenner DJ, Sachs RK (2006) Estimating radiation-induced cancer risks at very low doses: rationale for using a linear no-threshold approach. Radiat Environ Biophys 44:253–256PubMedCrossRef
5.
Schlemmer HP, Pichler BJ, Krieg R et al (2009) An integrated MR/PET system: prospective applications. Abdom Imaging 34:668–674PubMedCrossRef
6.
von Schulthess GK, Burger C (2010) Integrating imaging modalities: what makes sense from a workflow perspective? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:980–990CrossRef
7.
8.
Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B et al (2011) Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med 52:1914–1922PubMedCrossRef
9.
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 Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:1691–1701PubMedCrossRef
10.
Hofmann M, Bezrukov I, Mantlik F et al (2011) MR-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MR: quantitative evaluation of segmentation- and atlas-based methods. J Nucl Med 52:1392–1399PubMedCrossRef
11.
Stauss J, Franzius C, Pfluger T et al (2008) European Association of Nuclear Medicine. Guidelines for 18F-FDG PET and PET-CT imaging in paediatric oncology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35:1581–1588PubMedCrossRef
12.
Fahey FH, Treves ST, Adelstein SJ (2011) Minimizing and communicating radiation risk in pediatric nuclear medicine. J Nucl Med 52:1240–1251PubMed
13.
Chawla SC, Federman N, Zhang D et al (2010) Estimated cumulative radiation dose from PET/CT in children with malignancies: a 5-year retrospective review. Pediatr Radiol 40:681–686PubMedCrossRef
14.
Krohmer S, Sorge I, Krausse A et al (2010) Whole-body MR for primary evaluation of malignant disease in children. Eur J Radiol 74:256–261PubMedCrossRef
15.
Schwenzer NF, Schmidt H, Claussen CD (2012) Whole-body MR/PET: applications in abdominal imaging. Abdom Imaging 37:20–28PubMedCrossRef
16.
Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS et al (2003) Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MR for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 290:3199–3206PubMedCrossRef
17.
Tsushima Y, Takano A, Taketomi-Takahashi A et al (2007) Body diffusion-weighted MR imaging using high b-value for malignant tumor screening: usefulness and necessity of referring to T2-weighted images and creating fusion images. Acad Radiol 14:643–650PubMedCrossRef
18.
19.
Franzius C, Stauss J, Pfluger T et al (2010) Procedure guidelines for whole-body 18F-FDG PET and PET/CT in children with malignant diseases. Nuklearmedizin 49:225–233PubMedCrossRef
20.
Kluge R, Körholz D (2011) Die Bedeutung des FDG-PET für die Stadieneinteilung und Therapie des Hodgkin-Lymphoms im Kindesalter [Role of FDG-PET in staging and therapy of children with Hodgkin lymphoma]. Klin Padiatr 223:315–319PubMedCrossRef
21.
Takenaka D, Ohno Y, Matsumoto K et al (2009) Detection of bone metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients: comparison of whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), whole-body MR imaging without and with DWI, whole-body FDG-PET/CT, and bone scintigraphy. J Magn Reson Imaging 30:298–308PubMedCrossRef
22.
Takahara T, Imai Y, Yamashita T et al (2004) Diffusion weighted whole body imaging with background body signal suppression (DWIBS): technical improvement using free breathing, STIR and high resolution 3D display. Radiat Med 22:275–282PubMed
23.
King AD, Ahuja AT, Yeung DK et al (2007) Malignant cervical lymphadenopathy: diagnostic accuracy of diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Radiology 245:806–813PubMedCrossRef
24.
Melzer HI, Coppenrath E, Schmid I et al (2011) 123I-MIBG scintigraphy/SPECT versus 18F-FDG PET in paediatric neuroblastoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 38:1648–1658PubMedCrossRef
25.
Papathanasiou ND, Gaze MN, Sullivan K (2011) 18F-FDG PET/CT and 123I-metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging in high-risk neuroblastoma: diagnostic comparison and survival analysis. J Nucl Med 52:519–525PubMedCrossRef
26.
Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME et al (2007) International harmonization project on lymphoma. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 25:579–586PubMedCrossRef
27.
Histed SN, Lindenberg ML, Mena E et al (2012) Review of functional/anatomical imaging in oncology. Nucl Med Commun 33:349–361PubMedCrossRef
28.
Pichler BJ, Kolb A, Nägele T et al (2010) PET/MR: paving the way for the next generation of clinical multimodality imaging applications. J Nucl Med 51:333–336PubMedCrossRef
29.
Chavhan GB, Babyn PS (2011) Whole-body MR imaging in children: principles, technique, current applications, and future directions. Radiographics 31:1757–1772PubMedCrossRef
30.
Goo HW, Choi SH, Ghim T et al (2005) Whole-body MR of paediatric malignant tumours: comparison with conventional oncological imaging methods. Pediatr Radiol 35:766–773PubMedCrossRef
31.
Jadvar H, Connolly LP, Fahey FH et al (2007) PET and PET/CT in pediatric oncology. Semin Nucl Med 37:316–331PubMedCrossRef
32.
Weckesser M (2009) Molecular imaging with positron emission tomography in paediatric oncology – FDG and beyond. Pediatr Radiol 39(Suppl 3):450–455PubMedCrossRef
33.
Purz S, Mauz-Körholz C, Körholz D et al (2011) [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for detection of bone marrow involvement in children and adolescents with Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 29:3523–3528PubMedCrossRef
34.
Kwee TC, Takahara T, Vermoolen MA et al (2010) Whole-body diffusion-weighted imaging for staging malignant lymphoma in children. Pediatr Radiol 40:1592–1602PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
PET/MR in children. Initial clinical experience in paediatric oncology using an integrated PET/MR scanner
Authors
Franz Wolfgang Hirsch
Bernhard Sattler
Ina Sorge
Lars Kurch
Adrian Viehweger
Lutz Ritter
Peter Werner
Thies Jochimsen
Henryk Barthel
Uta Bierbach
Holger Till
Osama Sabri
Regine Kluge
Publication date
01-07-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 7/2013
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-012-2570-4

Other articles of this Issue 7/2013

Pediatric Radiology 7/2013 Go to the issue

Pediatric Radiology CME Activity

Pediatric Radiology continuing medical education activity

Letter to the Editor

Reply to Findley et al. regarding Daubert and the rules of evidence

Letter to the Editor

Admissibility of shaken baby syndrome/abusive head trauma evidence

Case Report

Distinctive pattern of restricted diffusion in a neonate with molybdenum cofactor deficiency

Original Article

Paediatric urological investigations—dose comparison between urology-related and CT irradiation

Hermes

Hermes