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

This Article Abstract 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 Beyer, T. Articles by Stattaus, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Beyer, T. Articles by Stattaus, J.

Optimized Intravenous Contrast Administration for Diagnostic Whole-Body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT

¹ Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
² Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany

View larger version (117K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 1. (A) Diagnostic image quality and contrast-induced abnormalities were assessed independently for 3 axial imaging ranges: neck, thorax, and abdomen. (B) Examples of diagnostic quality of thoracic CT images: 3 (very good), 2 (good), 1 (poor). (C) Examples of PET images after CT-based attenuation correction without and with artifact from intravenous contrast (arrow) are shown.

View larger version (110K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 2. (A) Diagnostic quality of CT images averaged over ratings by 3 radiology reviewers. CT image quality was lowest for nonenhanced studies (protocol A) but increased throughout whole-body imaging range when intravenous contrast was used (protocols B–D). Examples of CT images (B) of abdomen for subjects enrolled in protocols A (nonenhanced) and B–D (intravenous contrast according to Table 1) are shown. Prot = protocol.

View larger version (39K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 3. Average number of CT image artifacts attributed to intravenous contrast in neck, thorax, and abdomen. Examples of CT images are shown to illustrate artifacts (arrows) for protocols B and C. Zoomed inserts are shown to the left and right for B and C, respectively. Protocol B also resulted in 1 case with reported high-density artifacts in abdomen as reported by 1 radiology reader (example not shown).

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 4. Average CT attenuation in major vessels of whole-body CT images from PET/CT examinations with contrast administration protocols A–D (Table 1).

View larger version (53K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 5. Number of attenuation-corrected PET studies with abnormal tracer uptake attributed to focal accumulations of intravenous contrast through protocols A–D. Axial PET images (after CT-based attenuation correction) through apex of lungs are shown for protocols A–D with arrows pointing to reported artifactual findings on PET.

View larger version (98K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 6. 18F-FDG PET/CT study following the modified contrast injection protocol D. Coronal CT view illustrates uniform vessel enhancement throughout whole-body imaging range. Axial CT and corrected PET images are shown through area of subclavian vein to demonstrate absence of contrast-induced abnormalities.