| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Clinical Investigations |
Division of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
CT images represent essentially noiseless maps of photon attenuation at a range of 40–140 keV. Current dual-modality PET/CT scanners transform them into attenuation coefficients at 511 keV and use these for PET attenuation correction. The proportional scaling algorithms hereby used account for the different properties of soft tissue and bone but are not prepared to handle material with other attenuation characteristics, such as oral CT contrast agents. As a consequence, CT-based attenuation correction in the presence of an oral contrast agent results in erroneous PET standardized uptake values (SUVs). The present study assessed these errors with phantom measurements and patient data. Methods: Two oral CT contrast agents were imaged at 3 different concentrations in dual-modality CT and PET transmission studies to investigate their attenuation properties. The SUV error due to the presence of contrast agent in CT-based attenuation correction was estimated in 10 patients with gastrointestinal tumors as follows. The PET data were attenuation corrected on the basis of the original contrast-enhanced CT images, resulting in PET images with distorted SUVs. A second reconstruction used modified CT images wherein the CT numbers representing contrast agent had been replaced by CT values producing approximately the right PET attenuation coefficients. These CT values had been derived from the data of 10 patients imaged without a CT contrast agent. The SUV error, defined as the difference between both sets of SUV images, was evaluated in regions with oral CT contrast agent, in tumor, and in reference tissue. Results: The oral CT contrast agents studied increased the attenuation for 511-keV photons minimally, even at the highest concentrations found in the patients. For a CT value of 500 Hounsfield units, the proportional scaling algorithm therefore overestimated the PET attenuation coefficient by 26.2%. The resulting SUV error in the patient studies was highest in regions containing CT contrast agent (4.4% ± 2.8%; maximum, 11.3%), whereas 1.2% ± 1.1% (maximum, 4.1%) was found in tumors, and 0.6% ± 0.7% was found in the reference. Conclusion: The use of oral contrast agents in CT has only a small effect on the SUV, and this small effect does not appear to be medically significant.
Key Words: PET/CT • PET attenuation coefficient • oral CT contrast agent • CT-based PET attenuation correction • attenuation correction artifact
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. J. Gollub, R. Hong, D. M. Sarasohn, and T. Akhurst Limitations of CT During PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1583 - 1591. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Buther, L. Stegger, M. Dawood, F. Range, M. Schafers, R. Fischbach, T. Wichter, O. Schober, and K. P Schafers Effective Methods to Correct Contrast Agent-Induced Errors in PET Quantification in Cardiac PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., July 1, 2007; 48(7): 1060 - 1068. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. V. Vogel, J. A. van Dalen, B. Wiering, H. Huisman, F. H.M. Corstens, T. J.M. Ruers, and W. J.G. Oyen Evaluation of Image Registration in PET/CT of the Liver and Recommendations for Optimized Imaging J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2007; 48(6): 910 - 919. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. De Wever, Y. Vankan, S. Stroobants, and J. Verschakelen Detection of extrapulmonary lesions with integrated PET/CT in the staging of lung cancer Eur. Respir. J., May 1, 2007; 29(5): 995 - 1002. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. R. Cherry The 2006 Henry N. Wagner Lecture: Of Mice and Men (and Positrons)--Advances in PET Imaging Technology J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2006; 47(11): 1735 - 1745. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Rodriguez-Vigil, N. Gomez-Leon, I. Pinilla, D. Hernandez-Maraver, J. Coya, L. Martin-Curto, and R. Madero PET/CT in Lymphoma: Prospective Study of Enhanced Full-Dose PET/CT Versus Unenhanced Low-Dose PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2006; 47(10): 1643 - 1648. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. A. Blake, A. Singh, B. N. Setty, J. Slattery, M. Kalra, M. M. Maher, D. V. Sahani, A. J. Fischman, and P. R. Mueller Pearls and Pitfalls in Interpretation of Abdominal and Pelvic PET-CT RadioGraphics, September 1, 2006; 26(5): 1335 - 1353. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Delbeke, R. E. Coleman, M. J. Guiberteau, M. L. Brown, H. D. Royal, B. A. Siegel, D. W. Townsend, L. L. Berland, J. A. Parker, G. Zubal, et al. Procedure Guideline for SPECT/CT Imaging 1.0 J. Nucl. Med., July 1, 2006; 47(7): 1227 - 1234. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. K. von Schulthess, H. C. Steinert, and T. F. Hany Integrated PET/CT: Current Applications and Future Directions Radiology, February 1, 2006; 238(2): 405 - 422. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. Sureshbabu and O. Mawlawi PET/CT Imaging Artifacts J. Nucl. Med. Technol., September 1, 2005; 33(3): 156 - 161. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. E. Coleman, D. Delbeke, M. J. Guiberteau, P. S. Conti, H. D. Royal, J. C. Weinreb, B. A. Siegel, M. F. Federle, D. W. Townsend, and L. L. Berland Concurrent PET/CT with an Integrated Imaging System: Intersociety Dialogue from the Joint Working Group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance J. Nucl. Med., July 1, 2005; 46(7): 1225 - 1239. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Beyer, G. Antoch, A. Bockisch, and J. Stattaus Optimized Intravenous Contrast Administration for Diagnostic Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2005; 46(3): 429 - 435. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. P. DiFilippo and R. C. Brunken Do Implanted Pacemaker Leads and ICD Leads Cause Metal-Related Artifact in Cardiac PET/CT? J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2005; 46(3): 436 - 443. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Gutzeit, G. Antoch, H. Kuhl, T. Egelhof, M. Fischer, E. Hauth, S. Goehde, A. Bockisch, J. Debatin, and L. Freudenberg Unknown Primary Tumors: Detection with Dual-Modality PET/CT--Initial Experience Radiology, January 1, 2005; 234(1): 227 - 234. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Antoch, N. Saoudi, H. Kuehl, G. Dahmen, S. P. Mueller, T. Beyer, A. Bockisch, J. F. Debatin, and L. S. Freudenberg Accuracy of Whole-Body Dual-Modality Fluorine-18-2-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-D-Glucose Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) for Tumor Staging in Solid Tumors: Comparison With CT and PET J. Clin. Oncol., November 1, 2004; 22(21): 4357 - 4368. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. G. Schaefer, T. F. Hany, C. Taverna, B. Seifert, K. D. M. Stumpe, G. K. von Schulthess, and G. W. Goerres Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Hodgkin Disease: Coregistered FDG PET and CT at Staging and Restaging--Do We Need Contrast-enhanced CT? Radiology, September 1, 2004; 232(3): 823 - 829. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. G. Roberts and B. L. Shulkin Technical Issues in Performing PET Studies in Pediatric Patients J. Nucl. Med. Technol., March 1, 2004; 32(1): 5 - 9. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. V. Vogel, W. J.G. Oyen, J. O. Barentsz, J. H.A.M. Kaanders, and F. H.M. Corstens PET/CT: Panacea, Redundancy, or Something in Between? J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2004; 45(90010): 15S - 24. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Antoch, L. S. Freudenberg, T. Beyer, A. Bockisch, and J. F. Debatin To Enhance or Not to Enhance? 18F-FDG and CT Contrast Agents in Dual-Modality 18F-FDG PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2004; 45(90010): 56S - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Antoch, F. M. Vogt, L. S. Freudenberg, F. Nazaradeh, S. C. Goehde, J. Barkhausen, G. Dahmen, A. Bockisch, J. F. Debatin, and S. G. Ruehm Whole-Body Dual-Modality PET/CT and Whole-Body MRI for Tumor Staging in Oncology JAMA, December 24, 2003; 290(24): 3199 - 3206. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Schiepers PET/CT in Colorectal Cancer J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2003; 44(11): 1804 - 1805. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |
