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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
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
Radiological Physics and Technology
Published in: Radiological Physics and Technology 3/2019

01-09-2019

Influence of image noise and object size on segmentation accuracy of FDG-PET imaging: a phantom experiment

Authors: Yoshiyuki Takahashi, Tatsuya Tsuchitani, Noriko Kotoura, Kazuhiro Kitajima

Published in: Radiological Physics and Technology | Issue 3/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate the influence of noise and object size on segmentation accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) imaging. The scanned data of spherical phantoms were used. For the gradient method, 40% maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) method, and SUV of 2.5 threshold method, we evaluated the correlation between segmentation accuracy and background variability and that between segmentation accuracy and sphere diameters. For the gradient method, background variability did not affect segmentation accuracy, but sphere diameters had a small effect. As for the 40% SUVmax threshold method, both sphere diameters and background variability affected the segmentation accuracy. In the SUV of 2.5 threshold method, segmentation accuracy was affected by sphere diameters but not by background variability. With regard to segmentation accuracy of FDG-PET imaging, the gradient method may be more accurate and reliable compared to threshold methods when applied to images with varying noise or object size.
Literature
1.
von Schulthess GK, Steinert HC, Hany TF. Integrated PET/CT: current applications and future directions. Radiology. 2006;238:405–22.CrossRef
2.
Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, Herholz K, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma AA, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:1773–82.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Basu S, Zaidi H, Holm S, Alavi A. Quantitative techniques in PET-CT imaging. Curr Med Imaging Rev. 2011;7:216–33.CrossRef
4.
Shankar LK, Hoffman JM, Bacharach S, Graham MM, Karp J, Lammertsma AA, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1059–66.PubMed
5.
Sugawara Y, Zasadny K, Neuhoff A, Wahl R. Re-evaluation of the standardized uptake value for FDG: variations with body weight and methods for correction. Radiology. 1999;213:521–5.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Beaulieu S, Kinahan P, Tseng J, Dunnwald LK, Schubert EK, Pham P, et al. SUV varies with time after injection in (18)F-FDG PET of breast cancer: characterization and method to adjust for time differences. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1044–50.PubMed
7.
Srinivas SM, Dhurairaj T, Basu S, Bural G, Surti S, Alavi A. A recovery coefficient method for partial volume correction of PET images. Ann Nucl Med. 2009;23:341–8.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:932–45.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med. 2009;50(Suppl 1):122S–50S.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Kitajima K, Doi H, Kuribayashi K, Hashimoto M, Tsuchitani T, Tanooka M, et al. Prognostic value of pretreatment volume-based quantitative 18F-FDG PET/CT parameters in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Eur J Radiol. 2017;86:176–83.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Kitajima K, Miyoshi Y, Yamano T, Odawara S, Higuchi T, Yamakado K. Prognostic value of FDG-PET and DWI in breast cancer. Ann Nucl Med. 2018;32:44–53.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Geets X, Lee JA, Bol A, Lonneux M, Grégoire V. A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:1427–38.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Werner-Wasik M, Nelson AD, Choi W, Arai Y, Faulhaber PF, Kang P, et al. What is the best way to contour lung tumors on PET scans? Multiobserver validation of a gradient-based method using a NSCLC digital PET phantom. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:1164–71.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Foster B, Bagci U, Mansoor A, Xu Z, Mollura DJ. A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images. Comput Biol Med. 2014;50:76–96.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Surti S, Kuhn A, Werner ME, et al. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:471–80.PubMed
16.
Hong R, Halama J, Bova D, Sethi A, Emami B. Correlation of PET standard uptake value and CT window-level thresholds for target delineation in CT-based radiation treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007;67:720–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Ling CC, Rosenzweig KE, Schoder H, Larson SM, et al. Effect of respiratory gating on quantifying PET images of lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:876–81.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Influence of image noise and object size on segmentation accuracy of FDG-PET imaging: a phantom experiment
Authors
Yoshiyuki Takahashi
Tatsuya Tsuchitani
Noriko Kotoura
Kazuhiro Kitajima
Publication date
01-09-2019
Publisher
Springer Singapore
Published in
Radiological Physics and Technology / Issue 3/2019
Print ISSN: 1865-0333
Electronic ISSN: 1865-0341
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-019-00525-7

Other articles of this Issue 3/2019

Radiological Physics and Technology 3/2019 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Evaluation of a 3D-printed heterogeneous anthropomorphic head and neck phantom for patient-specific quality assurance in intensity-modulated radiation therapy

OriginalPaper

Biological polymeric shielding design for an X-ray laboratory using Monte Carlo codes

OriginalPaper

Dosimetric assessment of a single-energy metal artifact reduction algorithm for computed tomography images in radiation therapy

ReviewPaper

Overview of image-to-image translation by use of deep neural networks: denoising, super-resolution, modality conversion, and reconstruction in medical imaging

OriginalPaper

Influence of the size of nano- and microparticles and photon energy on mass attenuation coefficients of bismuth–silicon shields in diagnostic radiology

BriefCommunication

Effects of different fat-suppression methods on T1 values in dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging: a phantom study