Top

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Published in:

01-09-2020 | Positron Emission Tomography | Original Article

Dynamic whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET for differentiating abnormal lesions from physiological uptake

Authors: Motoki Nishimura, Nagara Tamaki, Shigenori Matsushima, Maki Kiba, Tomoya Kotani, Chisa Bamba, Yasunori Nakamura, Kei Yamada

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 10/2020

Abstract

Purpose

Serial assessment of visual change in ¹⁸F-FDG uptake on whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET imaging was performed to differentiate pathological uptake from physiological uptake in the urinary and gastrointestinal tracts.

Methods

In 88 suspected cancer patients, serial 3-min dynamic whole-body PET imaging was performed four times, from 60 min after ¹⁸F-FDG administration. In dynamic image evaluation, high ¹⁸F-FDG uptake was evaluated by two nuclear medicine physicians and classified as “changed” or “unchanged” based on change in uptake shape over time. Detectability of pathological uptake based on these criteria was assessed and compared with conventional image evaluation.

Results

Dynamic whole-body PET imaging provided images of adequate quality for visual assessment. Dynamic image evaluation was “changed” in 118/154 regions of high physiological ¹⁸F-FDG uptake (77%): in 9/19 areas in the stomach (47%), in 32/39 in the small intestine (82%), in 17/33 in the colon (52%), and in 60/63 in the urinary tract (95%). In the 86 benign or malignant lesions, 84 lesions (98%) were “unchanged.” A high ¹⁸F-FDG uptake area that shows no change over time using these criteria is highly likely to represent pathological uptake, with sensitivity of 97%, specificity of 76%, PPV of 70%, NPV of 98%, and accuracy of 84%.

Conclusion

Dynamic whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET imaging enabled differentiation of pathological uptake from physiological uptake in the urinary and gastrointestinal tracts, based on visual change of uptake shape.

Fletcher JW, Djulbegovic B, Soares HP, Siegel BA, Lowe VJ, Lyman GH, et al. Recommendations on the use of ¹⁸F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:480–508.CrossRef

El-Galaly TC, Gormsen LC, Hutchings M. PET/CT for staging: past, present, and future. Semin Nucl Med. 2017;48:4–16.CrossRef

Shen G, Lan Y, Zhang K, Ren P, Jia Z. Comparison of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT and DWI for detection of mediastinal nodal metastasis in non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0173104. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173104.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dahlbom M, Reed J, Young J. Implementation of true continuous bed motion in 2-D and 3-D whole-body PET scanning. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48(4):1465–9.CrossRef

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. 2014;5(1):56–64.PubMedPubMedCentral

Karakatsanis NA, Casey ME, Lodge MA, Rahmim A, Zaidi H. Whole-body direct 4D parametric PET imaging employing nested generalized Patlak expectation-maximization reconstruction. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61(15):5456–85.CrossRef

Braune A, Hofheinz F, Bluth T, Kiss T, Wittenstein J, Scharffenberg M, et al. Comparison of static ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT (SUV, SUR) and dynamic ¹⁸F-FDG-PET/CT (Ki) for quantification of pulmonary inflammation in acute lung injury. J Nucl Med. 2019;60(11):1629–34.CrossRef

Rahmim A, Lodge MA, Karakatsanis NA, Panin VY, Zhou Y, McMillan A, et al. Dynamic whole-body PET imaging: principles, potentials and applications. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2019;46:501–18.CrossRef

Gutman F, Alberini JL, Wartski M, Vilain D, Le Stanc E, Sarandi F, et al. Incidental colonic focal lesions detected by FDG PET/CT. Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:495–500.CrossRef

10.

Tatlidil R, Jadvar H, Bading JR, Conti PS. Incidental colonic fluorodeoxyglucose uptake: correlation with colonoscopic and histopathologic findings. Radiology. 2002;224:783–7.CrossRef

11.

Kostakoglu L, Hardoff R, Mirtcheva R, Goldsmith SJ. PET-CT fusion imaging in differentiating physiologic from pathologic FDG uptake. Radiographics. 2004;24:1411–31.CrossRef

12.

Drenth JP, Nagengast FM, Oyen WJ. Evaluation of (pre-)malignant colonic abnormalities: endoscopic validation of FDG-PET findings. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1766–9.CrossRef

13.

Kamel EM, Thumshirn M, Truninger K, Schiesser M, Fried M, Padberg B, et al. Significance of incidental ¹⁸F-FDG accumulations in the gastrointestinal tract in PET/CT: correlation with endoscopic and histopathologic results. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1804–10.PubMed

14.

Israel O, Yefremov N, Bar-Shalom R, Kagana O, Frenkel A, Keidar Z, et al. PET/CT detection of unexpected gastrointestinal foci of ¹⁸F-FDG uptake: incidence, localization patterns, and clinical significance. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:758–62.PubMed

15.

Shinya T, Rai K, Okumura Y, Fujiwara K, Matsuo K, Yonei T, et al. Dual-time-point F-18 FDG PET/CT for evaluation of intrathoracic lymph nodes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Clin Nucl Med. 2009;34:216–21.CrossRef

16.

Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A, Alavi A. Dual time point ¹⁸F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:871–5.PubMed

17.

Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Monden T, Sasakawa Y, Tsutsui K, Wakabayashi H, et al. Evaluation of delayed additional FDG PET imaging in patients with pancreatic tumour. Nucl Med Commun. 2005;26:895–901.CrossRef

18.

Lin WY, Tsai SC, Hung GU. Value of delayed ¹⁸F-FDG-PET imaging in the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2005;26:315–21.CrossRef

19.

Choi EK, Yoo IR, Kim SH, O JH, Choi WH, Na SJ, et al. The clinical value of dual-time point ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT for differentiating extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from benign disease. Clin Nucl Med. 2013;38(3):e106–11. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e318266f402.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Naganawa S, Yoshikawa T, Yasaka K, Maeda E, Hyashi N, Abe O. Role of delayed-time-point imaging during abdominal and pelvic cancer screening using FDG-PET/CT in the general population. Medicine. 2017;96(46):e8832.CrossRef

21.

Zade A, Purandare N, Rangarajan V, Shah S, Agarwal A, Kulkarni M, et al. Role of delayed imaging to differentiate intense physiological ¹⁸F FDG uptake from peritoneal deposits in patients presenting with intestinal obstruction. Clin Nucl Med. 2012;37(8):783–5. https://doi.org/10.1097/RLU.0b013e31824c5e7d.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Toriihara A, Yoshida K, Umehara I, Shibuya H. Normal variants of bowel FDG uptake in dual-time-point PET/CT imaging. Ann Nucl Med. 2011;25(3):173–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-010-0439-x.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Miyake KK, Nakamoto J, Torashi K. Dual-time-point ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in patients with colorectal cancer: clinical value of early delayed scanning. Ann Nucl Med. 2012;26:492–500.CrossRef

24.

Uemura Y, Demura Y, Morikawa M, Anzai M, Kadowaki M, Ameshima S, et al. Prognostic value of dual-time-point ¹⁸F-FDG PET for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. J Nucl Med. 2015;56:1869–75.CrossRef

25.

Yoon HJ, Yoo J, Lee DH, Kim BS. Enhanced application of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT in bladder cancer by adding early dynamic acquisition to a standard delayed PET protocol. Clin Nucl Med. 2017;42(10):749–55.CrossRef

26.

Humbert O, Lasserre M, Bertaut A, Fumoleau P, Coutant C, Brunotte F, et al. Breast cancer blood flow and metabolism on dual-acquisition ¹⁸F-FDG PET: correlation with tumor phenotype and neoadjuvant chemotherapy response. J Nucl Med. 2018;59:1035–41.CrossRef

27.

van Sluis J, Boellaard R, Somasundaram A, van Snick P, Borra R, Dierckx R, et al. Image quality and semi-quantitative measurements of the Siemens Biograph Vision PET/CT: initial experiences and comparison with Siemens Biograph mCT PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2019. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.227801.

28.

Nishimura M, Tamaki N, Matsushima S, Yamada S, Nii T, Domoto H, et al. Uptake changes on the whole-body dynamic ¹⁸F-FDG PET may assess tissue characterization. Comparison with the conventional delayed scan. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:1284.CrossRef

Title: Dynamic whole-body 18F-FDG PET for differentiating abnormal lesions from physiological uptake
Authors: Motoki Nishimura
Nagara Tamaki
Shigenori Matsushima
Maki Kiba
Tomoya Kotani
Chisa Bamba
Yasunori Nakamura
Kei Yamada
Publication date: 01-09-2020
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keyword: Positron Emission Tomography
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 10/2020
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-04726-w

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Dynamic whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET for differentiating abnormal lesions from physiological uptake

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2020

Multiparametric imaging hippocampal neurodegeneration and functional connectivity with simultaneous PET/MRI in Alzheimer’s disease

Reply to Letter to the Editor: “The added benefit of contrast-enhanced CT in the evaluation of incidental FDG-avid colon lesions”

Evaluation of improved attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MR on patients with bone metastasis using various radiotracers

Correction to: Staging and quantification of florbetaben PET images using machine learning: impact of predicted regional cortical tracer uptake and amyloid stage on clinical outcomes

Anatomy of 18F-GE180, a failed radioligand for the TSPO protein

Influence of 18F-FDG PET/CT on clinical management and outcome in patients with advanced melanoma not primarily selected for surgery based on a linked evidence approach