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 STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2013

01-01-2013 | Original Article

Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT

Authors: Marco Wiesmüller, Harald H. Quick, Bharath Navalpakkam, Michael M. Lell, Michael Uder, Philipp Ritt, Daniela Schmidt, Michael Beck, Torsten Kuwert, Carl C. von Gall

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 1/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

PET/MR hybrid scanners have recently been introduced, but not yet validated. The aim of this study was to compare the PET components of a PET/CT hybrid system and of a simultaneous whole-body PET/MR hybrid system with regard to reproducibility of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake.

Methods

A total of 46 patients underwent a whole-body PET/CT scan 1 h after injection and an average of 88 min later a second scan using a hybrid PET/MR system. The radioactive tracers used were 18F-deoxyglucose (FDG), 18F-ethylcholine (FEC) and 68Ga-DOTATATE (Ga-DOTATATE). The PET images from PET/CT (PETCT) and from PET/MR (PETMR) were analysed for tracer-positive lesions. Regional tracer uptake in these foci was quantified using volumes of interest, and maximal and average standardized uptake values (SUVmax and SUVavg, respectively) were calculated.

Results

Of the 46 patients, 43 were eligible for comparison and statistical analysis. All lesions except one identified by PETCT were identified by PETMR (99.2 %). In 38 patients (88.4 %), the same number of foci were identified by PETCT and by PETMR. In four patients, more lesions were identified by PETMR than by PETCT, in one patient PETCT revealed an additional focus compared to PETMR. The mean SUVmax and SUVavg of all lesions determined by PETMR were by 21 % and 11 % lower, respectively, than the values determined by PETCT (p < 0.05), and a strong correlation between these variables was identified (Spearman rho 0.835; p < 0.01).

Conclusion

PET/MR showed equivalent performance in terms of qualitative lesion detection to PET/CT. The differences demonstrated in quantitation of tracer uptake between PETCT and PETMR were minor, but statistically significant. Nevertheless, a more detailed study of the quantitative accuracy of PETMR and the factors governing it is needed to ultimately assess its accuracy in measuring tissue tracer concentrations.
Literature
1.
Cuocolo A, Breatnach E. Multimodality imaging in Europe: a survey by the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and the European Society of Radiology (ESR). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(1):163–7.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Rosenbaum J, Basu S, Beckerman S, Werner T, Torigian DA, Alavi A. Evaluation of diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG-PET compared to CT in detecting potential causes of fever of unknown origin in an academic centre. Hell J Nucl Med. 2011;14(3):255–9.PubMed
3.
Schiepers C, Dahlbom M. Molecular imaging in oncology: the acceptance of PET/CT and the emergence of MR/PET imaging. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(3):548–54.PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
Freudenberg LS, Rosenbaum SJ, Beyer T, Bockisch A, Antoch G. PET versus PET/CT dual-modality imaging in evaluation of lung cancer. Thorac Surg Clin. 2010;20(1):25–30.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Ell PJ. The contribution of PET/CT to improved patient management. Br J Radiol. 2006;79(937):32–6.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Rosenbaum SJ, Lind T, Antoch G, Bockisch A. False-positive FDG PET uptake – the role of PET/CT. Eur Radiol. 2006;16(5):1054–65.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Bockisch A, Freudenberg LS, Schmidt D, Kuwert T. Hybrid imaging by SPECT/CT and PET/CT: proven outcomes in cancer imaging. Semin Nucl Med. 2009;39(4):276–89.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Chawla SC, Federman N, Zhang D, Nagata K, Nuthakki S, McNitt-Gray M, et al. Estimated cumulative radiation dose from PET/CT in children with malignancies: a 5-year retrospective review. Pediatr Radiol. 2010;40(5):681–6.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Mattsson S, Söderberg M. Radiation dose management in CT, SPECT/CT and PET/CT techniques. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2011;147(1–2):13–21.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Judenhofer MS, Wehrl HF, Newport DF, Catana C, Siegel SB, Becker M, et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging. Nat Med. 2008;14(4):459–65.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Pichler BJ, Judenhofer MS, Catana C, Walton JH, Kneilling M, Nutt RE, et al. Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(4):639–47.PubMed
13.
Hofmann M, Pichler B, Schölkopf B, Beyer T. Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36 Suppl 1:S93–104.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Judenhofer MS, Catana C, Swann BK, Siegel SB, Jung W-I, Nutt RE, et al. PET/MR images acquired with a compact MR-compatible PET detector in a 7-T magnet. Radiology. 2007;244(3):807–14.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Catana C, Procissi D, Wu Y, Judenhofer MS, Qi J, Pichler BJ, et al. Simultaneous in vivo positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(10):3705–10.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS, Wiehr S, Pichler BJ. Pre-clinical PET/MR: technological advances and new perspectives in biomedical research. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;36 Suppl 1:S56–68.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Boss A, Bisdas S, Kolb A, Hofmann M, Ernemann U, Claussen CD, et al. Hybrid PET/MRI of intracranial masses: initial experiences and comparison to PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(8):1198–205.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Boss A, Stegger L, Bisdas S, Kolb A, Schwenzer N, Pfister M, et al. Feasibility of simultaneous PET/MR imaging in the head and upper neck area. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(7):1439–46.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Schlemmer H-PW, Pichler BJ, Schmand M, Burbar Z, Michel C, Ladebeck R, et al. Simultaneous MR/PET imaging of the human brain: feasibility study. Radiology. 2008;248(3):1028–35.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B, Ladebeck R, Ganter C, Nekolla SG, et al. Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(12):1914–22.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, Griesmer J, Hu Z, Maniawski P, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56(10):3091–106.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Kumar S, Pandey AK, Sharma P, Malhotra A, Kumar R. Optimization of the CT acquisition protocol to reduce patient dose without compromising the diagnostic quality for PET-CT: a phantom study. Nucl Med Commun. 2012;33(2):164–70.PubMedCrossRef
23.
Funama Y, Awai K, Nakayama Y, Kakei K, Nagasue N, Shimamura M, et al. Radiation dose reduction without degradation of low-contrast detectability at abdominal multisection CT with a low-tube voltage technique: phantom study. Radiology. 2005;237(3):905–10.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Martinez-Möller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G, Bundschuh RA, Chefd’hotel C, Ziegler SI, et al. Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(4):520–6.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Eiber M, Martinez-Möller A, Souvatzoglou M, et al. 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. 2011;38(9):1691–701.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Hofmann M, Bezrukov I, Mantlik F, Aschoff P, Steinke F, Beyer T, et al. MRI-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MRI: quantitative evaluation of segmentation-and atlas-based methods. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(9):1392–9.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A, Alavi A. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(7):871–5.PubMed
28.
Basu S, Kwee TC, Surti S, Akin EA, Yoo D, Alavi A. Fundamentals of PET and PET/CT imaging. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011;1228:1–18.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Zytoon AA, Murakami K, El-Kholy MR, El-Shorbagy E. Dual time point FDG-PET/CT imaging. Potential tool for diagnosis of breast cancer. Clin Radiol. 2008;63(11):1213–27.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Paquet N, Albert A, Foidart J, Hustinx R. Within-patient variability of (18)F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med. 2004;45(5):784–8.PubMed
31.
Lee JW, Kim S-K, Lee SM, Moon SH, Kim T-S. Detection of hepatic metastases using dual-time-point FDG PET/CT scans in patients with colorectal cancer. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011;13(3):565–72.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Drzezga A, Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, Beer AJ, Furst S, Martinez-Möller A, et al. First clinical experience with integrated whole-body PET/MR: comparison to PET/CT in patients with oncologic diagnoses. J Nucl Med. 2012;53(6):845–55.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA, Mottaghy FM, Lonsdale MN, Stroobants SG. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: Version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(1):181–200.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, Yamamoto AJ, Lanuti M, Li P, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(9):1412–7.PubMed
35.
Schwenzer NF, Schraml C, Müller M, Brendle C, Sauter A, Spengler W, et al. Pulmonary lesion assessment: comparison of whole-body hybrid MR/PET and PET/CT imaging – pilot study. Radiology. 2012;264(2):551–8.PubMedCrossRef
36.
Mantlik F, Hofmann M, Werner MK, Sauter A, Kupferschläger J, Schölkopf B, et al. The effect of patient positioning aids on PET quantification in PET/MR imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(5):920–9.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Vriens D, Visser EP, Geus-Oei L-F, Oyen WJG. Methodological considerations in quantification of oncological FDG PET studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2009;37(7):1408–25.PubMedCrossRef
38.
Tellmann L, Quick HH, Bockisch A, Herzog H, Beyer T. The effect of MR surface coils on PET quantification in whole-body PET/MR: results from a pseudo-PET/MR phantom study. Med Phys. 2011;38(5):2795–805.PubMedCrossRef
39.
Delso G, Martinez-Möller A, Bundschuh RA, Ladebeck R, Candidus Y, Faul D, et al. Evaluation of the attenuation properties of MR equipment for its use in a whole-body PET/MR scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55(15):4361–74.PubMedCrossRef
40.
MacDonald LR, Kohlmyer S, Liu C, Lewellen TK, Kinahan PE. Effects of MR surface coils on PET quantification. Med Phys. 2011;38(6):2948–56.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT
Authors
Marco Wiesmüller
Harald H. Quick
Bharath Navalpakkam
Michael M. Lell
Michael Uder
Philipp Ritt
Daniela Schmidt
Michael Beck
Torsten Kuwert
Carl C. von Gall
Publication date
01-01-2013
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 1/2013
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-012-2249-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2013 Go to the issue

Short Communication

The impact of coaxial core biopsy guided by FDG PET/CT in oncological patients

Letter to the Editor

Effects of type 2 diabetes mellitus on coronary microvascular function and myocardial perfusion in patients without obstructive coronary artery disease: reply to Presotto

Original Article

A European multicentre PET study of fibrillar amyloid in Alzheimer’s disease

Original Article

PET imaging of the brain serotonin transporters (SERT) with N,N-dimethyl-2-(2-amino-4-[18F]fluorophenylthio)benzylamine (4-[18F]-ADAM) in humans: a preliminary study

Original Article

Discrimination and anatomical mapping of PET-positive lesions: comparison of CT attenuation-corrected PET images with coregistered MR and CT images in the abdomen

Original Article

Comparison of the binding characteristics of [18F]THK-523 and other amyloid imaging tracers to Alzheimer’s disease pathology