Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
OtherLetters to the Editor

Imaging Protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in Overweight Patients: Limitations

Roland Talanow and Sankaran Shrikanthan
Journal of Nuclear Medicine April 2010, 51 (4) 662; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.109.070524
Roland Talanow
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sankaran Shrikanthan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

TO THE EDITOR: With excitement did we read the article “Comparison of Imaging Protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in Overweight Patients: Optimizing Scan Duration Versus Administered Dose” by Masuda et al. (1).

With the increasing prevalence of overweight patients who undergo PET, the weight-related deterioration of image quality becomes an increasing problem in daily work in nuclear medicine. As the first prospective study to investigate optimization of PET/CT technique in overweight patients, this study draws attention to the diagnostic imaging round. The results suggest that only prolonged scanning can maintain the quality of images of heavier patients.

These results seem promising, but certain questions need clarification.

First, the “heaviest group” of patients was defined as weighing 85 kg or more. Today, especially in Western industrialized countries, such a weight is nearly average. At our institution, we encounter patients weighing far over 150 kg on a daily basis (2). A further division of the last category would have been desirable—for example, a division according to the guidelines of the National Institutes of Health, whereby a body mass index (BMI) of 25–29.9 kg/m2 is classified as overweight, 30–39.9 kg/m2 as obese, and 40 kg/m2 or more as malignantly obese (2).

Second, it does not seem useful to apply an absolute weight as the parameter of choice. A tall but skinny person can weigh more than a short but overweight person. A study from 1994 (3) suggested that the use of body surface area (BSA) is preferable to body weight correction. However, a more recent study (4) suggested that BMI is a better variable than body weight and BSA, as BMI appeared to be a more independent variable than height, weight, and BSA. The reasons may be that BMI better reflects the mass distribution and “radius” of the patient, which is ultimately the culprit in attenuation and image deterioration. BMI is easy to measure and can easily be integrated into the protocol process.

Lastly, the authors suggested that the noise-equivalent counting rate is linearly proportional to the dose and gave the dose-dependent groups up to a 2.5-fold–corrected dose for 90-kg subjects (832 MBq)—a dose that is excessive and likely to saturate counting rates anyway. This fact was admitted even by the authors themselves: “the optimal dose for attaining 90% of peak SNR in 90-kg subjects was estimated to be 529 MBq. In the current study, the 2.5-fold–corrected dose for 90-kg subjects was 832 MBq. Thus, an administered dose with a 2.5-fold correction is excessive and likely to saturate counting rates.” Above this saturation dose level, scatter photons play an increasing role and have a greater influence on the total counts.

Footnotes

  • COPYRIGHT © 2010 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

References

  1. 1.↵
    Masuda Y, Kondo C, Matsuo Y, Uetani M, Kusakabe K. Comparison of imaging protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in overweight patients: optimizing scan duration versus administered dose. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:844–848.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in Adults: The Evidence Report. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health; 1998. NIH publication 98-4083.
  3. 3.↵
    Chun KK, Naresh CG, Chandramouli B, Alavi A. Standardized uptake values of FDG: body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:164–167.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    Tatsumi M, Clark PA, Nakamoto Y, Wahl RL. Impact of body habitus on quantitative and qualitative image quality in whole-body FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:40–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 51 (4)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 51, Issue 4
April 2010
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Imaging Protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in Overweight Patients: Limitations
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Imaging Protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in Overweight Patients: Limitations
Roland Talanow, Sankaran Shrikanthan
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Apr 2010, 51 (4) 662; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.070524

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Imaging Protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in Overweight Patients: Limitations
Roland Talanow, Sankaran Shrikanthan
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Apr 2010, 51 (4) 662; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.070524
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Business Model Beats Science and Logic: Dosimetry and Paucity of Its Use
  • Reply to “The Randomized, Phase 2 LuCAP Study”
  • Patient-Specific Dosimetry-Driven PRRT: Time to Move Forward!
Show more Letters to the Editor

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire