HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH RSS TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Votaw, J. R. Articles by White, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Votaw, J. R. Articles by White, M.

Comparison of 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional Cardiac ⁸²Rb PET Studies

Department of Radiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia

Most new PET scanners have the capability to collect data in 3-dimensional (3D) (septa removed) mode. This allows many more detected events at the cost of increased random events and scatter. In the case of ⁸²Rb imaging, the injected dose might have to be limited to avoid saturating the scanner. We present a comparison of 2-dimensional (2D) and 3D data collection for ⁸²Rb cardiac studies using the ECAT EXACT scanner. Methods: Resting ⁸²Rb cardiac studies were collected in 2D and 3D modes for 33 consecutive patients. Four experienced physicians rated the images to determine if the different acquisition methods would lead to different patient care. A separate quantitative analysis was performed on data from multiple scans of a thoracic phantom filled to simulate cardiac and background radioactivity corresponding to ⁸²Rb injections between 37 and 1740 MBq. Results: The 2D and 3D studies were significantly different, with the image quality being poorer in the 3D studies. The scanner collected data at near its maximal counting rate for either 1480-MBq 2D or 37-MBq 3D acquisitions. Because the data collection was counting rate limited in either mode, and there are more random and scatter events in 3D mode, the 2D acquisitions resulted in more detected true events and a better signal-to-noise ratio. Conclusion: Cardiac ⁸²Rb studies should be performed in 2D mode when using the ECAT EXACT scanner.

Key Words: 2D PET • 3D PET • ⁸²Rb • heart

This article has been cited by other articles:

				B. Sanghera, G. Lowe, D. Wellstead, J. Lowe, J. Chambers, and W. Wong Scan-Time Reduction Using Noise-Matched Images in 2- and 3-Dimensional Bismuth Germanate PET/CT: Clinical Study in Head and Neck Cancer J. Nucl. Med. Technol., June 1, 2009; 37(2): 74 - 82. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Ibaraki, S. Miura, E. Shimosegawa, S. Sugawara, T. Mizuta, A. Ishikawa, and M. Amano Quantification of Cerebral Blood Flow and Oxygen Metabolism with 3-Dimensional PET and 15O: Validation by Comparison with 2-Dimensional PET J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2008; 49(1): 50 - 59. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Schepis, O. Gaemperli, V. Treyer, I. Valenta, C. Burger, P. Koepfli, M. Namdar, I. Adachi, H. Alkadhi, and P. A. Kaufmann Absolute Quantification of Myocardial Blood Flow with 13N-Ammonia and 3-Dimensional PET J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2007; 48(11): 1783 - 1789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Lodge, R. D. Badawi, R. Gilbert, P. E. Dibos, and B. R. Line Comparison of 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional Acquisition for 18F-FDG PET Oncology Studies Performed on an LSO-Based Scanner J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2006; 47(1): 23 - 31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Schwaiger, S. Ziegler, and S. G. Nekolla PET/CT: Challenge for Nuclear Cardiology J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2005; 46(10): 1664 - 1678. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Brogsitter, T. Gruning, R. Weise, P. Wielepp, O. Lindner, R. Korfer, and W. Burchert 18F-FDG PET for Detecting Myocardial Viability: Validation of 3D Data Acquisition J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2005; 46(1): 19 - 24. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Lubberink, R. Boellaard, A. P. van der Weerdt, F. C. Visser, and A. A. Lammertsma Quantitative Comparison of Analytic and Iterative Reconstruction Methods in 2- and 3-Dimensional Dynamic Cardiac 18F-FDG PET J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2004; 45(12): 2008 - 2015. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Knesaurek, J. Machac, B. R. Krynyckyi, and O. D. Almeida Comparison of 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional 82Rb Myocardial Perfusion PET Imaging J. Nucl. Med., August 1, 2003; 44(8): 1350 - 1356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Knesaurek New Developments in PET Instrumentation: Quo Vadis PET? J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2001; 42(12): 1831 - 1832. [Full Text] [PDF]