| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Clinical Investigations |
1 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
2 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
Standard application of CT intravenous contrast agents in combined PET/CT may lead to high-density artifacts on CT and attenuation-corrected PET. To avoid associated diagnostic pitfalls, we designed and compared different intravenous contrast injection protocols for routine whole-body PET/CT. Methods: Whole-body PET/CT included a topogram and a single spiral CT scan (2-row) with or without intravenous contrast, followed by an emission scan. The CT scan was used for attenuation correction of the emission data. Four groups of 10 whole-body PET/CT referrals each were investigated: (A) no intravenous contrast agent, (B) biphasic injection (90 and 50 mL at 3 and 1.5 mL/s, respectively) of intravenous contrast (300 mg/mL iodine) and CT in the craniocaudal direction with a 30-s delay, (C) triple-phase injection (90, 40, and 40 mL at 3, 2, and 1.5 mL/s, respectively) in the craniocaudal direction with a 50-s delay, and (D) dual-phase injection (80 and 60 mL at 3 and 1.5 mL/s, respectively) in the caudocranial direction with a 50-s delay. CT image quality was assessed on a scale from 1 to 3, and CT and attenuation-corrected PET images were reviewed separately for contrast-induced artifacts. Results: Average CT image quality was poorest for protocol A (1.0) but improved to 2.8 when using intravenous contrast agents (protocols B–D). Only protocols B and C resulted in contrast-induced image artifacts that were limited to the thorax. The most homogeneous intravenous contrast enhancement without high-density image artifacts on either CT or PET after CT-based attenuation correction was achieved with protocol D. Conclusion: Dual-phase intravenous contrast injection and CT in the caudocranial direction with a 50-s delay yields reproducible high image quality and is now used routinely for combined diagnostic PET/CT at our hospital.
Key Words: combined PET/CT • CT intravenous contrast agent • image quality • image artifacts
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]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. D. Purcell, F. V. Coakley, B. L. Franc, R. A. Hawkins, S. E. Boddington, and B. M. Yeh Anterior Layering of Excreted 18F-FDG in the Bladder on PET/CT: Frequency and Cause Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2007; 189(2): W96 - W99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P Veit-Haibach, G Antoch, T Beyer, H Stergar, R Schleucher, E A M Hauth, and A Bockisch FDG-PET/CT in restaging of patients with recurrent breast cancer: possible impact on staging and therapy Br. J. Radiol., July 1, 2007; 80(955): 508 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A C Pfannenberg, P Aschoff, K Brechtel, M Muller, M Klein, R Bares, C D Claussen, and S M Eschmann Value of contrast-enhanced multiphase CT in combined PET/CT protocols for oncological imaging Br. J. Radiol., June 1, 2007; 80(954): 437 - 445. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Z. Wong, E. K. Paulson, R. C. Nelson, E. F. Patz Jr., and R. E. Coleman Practical Approach to Diagnostic CT Combined with PET Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2007; 188(3): 622 - 629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Kuehl, P. Veit, S. J. Rosenbaum, A. Bockisch, and G. Antoch Can PET/CT Replace Separate Diagnostic CT for Cancer Imaging? Optimizing CT Protocols for Imaging Cancers of the Chest and Abdomen J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2007; 48(1_suppl): 45S - 57S. [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]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Brechtel and T. Beyer Reply: Adequate Evaluation of Image Registration in Hybrid PET/CT. J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2006; 47(9): 1557 - 1558. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. S. Jhanwar and D. J. Straus The Role of PET in Lymphoma J. Nucl. Med., August 1, 2006; 47(8): 1326 - 1334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Brechtel, M. Klein, M. Vogel, M. Mueller, P. Aschoff, T. Beyer, S. M. Eschmann, R. Bares, C. D. Claussen, and A. C. Pfannenberg Optimized Contrast-Enhanced CT Protocols for Diagnostic Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET/CT: Technical Aspects of Single-Phase Versus Multiphase CT Imaging J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2006; 47(3): 470 - 476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Leboulleux, C. Dromain, G. Bonniaud, A. Auperin, B. Caillou, J. Lumbroso, R. Sigal, E. Baudin, and M. Schlumberger Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography in Adrenocortical Carcinoma: A Prospective Comparison with Computed Tomography J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2006; 91(3): 920 - 925. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Beyer, A. Bockisch, H. Kuhl, and M.-J. Martinez Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET/CT in the Presence of Truncation Artifacts J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2006; 47(1): 91 - 99. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Schoder, H. W.D. Yeung, and S. M. Larson CT in PET/CT: Essential Features of Interpretation J. Nucl. Med., August 1, 2005; 46(8): 1249 - 1251. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Brix, U. Lechel, G. Glatting, S. I. Ziegler, W. Munzing, S. P. Muller, and T. Beyer Radiation Exposure of Patients Undergoing Whole-Body Dual-Modality 18F-FDG PET/CT Examinations J. Nucl. Med., April 1, 2005; 46(4): 608 - 613. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE |
