Research ArticleCLINICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Comparison of 2-Dimensional and 3-Dimensional Acquisition for 18F-FDG PET Oncology Studies Performed on an LSO-Based Scanner

Martin A. Lodge, Ramsey D. Badawi, Richard Gilbert, Pablo E. Dibos and Bruce R. Line
Journal of Nuclear Medicine January 2006, 47 (1) 23-31;

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • FIGURE 1. 
    FIGURE 1. 

    Research data acquisition occurred over a single-bed position using an interleaved septa-in/septa-out acquisition protocol. At each position of the septa, emission data were acquired in a dynamic mode (4 frames of either 30- or 35-s duration). Six dynamic emission scans were acquired followed by a 3-min transmission scan.

  • FIGURE 2. 
    FIGURE 2. 

    Lesion contrast was estimated by dividing the maximum pixel value in a target region (ROI 1), by the mean pixel value in a background region (ROI 2). Image noise was estimated by placing a 1.5 × 1.5 cm square region (ROI 3) in a background area of the central slice. Note that in this example the lesion was present in the central slice, although this was not typically the case.

  • FIGURE 3. 
    FIGURE 3. 

    Target-to-background ratios for the 420-s 2D and 360-s 3D images. (A) Both 2D and 3D images were smoothed with a 6-mm FWHM gaussian filter after OSEM reconstruction. Mean target-to-background ratios for 2D and 3D images were 6.0 ± 3.3 and 5.5 ± 2.8 (P = 0.005), respectively. (B) 2D images were smoothed with a 6-mm FWHM gaussian filter; and 3D images were smoothed with a 5-mm gaussian filter. Mean target-to-background ratios for 2D and 3D images were 6.0 ± 3.3 and 5.8 ± 3.0 (P = 0.16), respectively.

  • FIGURE 4. 
    FIGURE 4. 

    Difference between 2D and 3D measurements, d, as a function of the average of the 2D and 3D measurements, a. (A) Data are shown in original units (SUV = standardized uptake value). (B) Data are shown after logarithmic transformation.

  • FIGURE 5. 
    FIGURE 5. 

    SD of 2D ROI data Embedded Image as a function of their average. (A) Data are shown in original units (SUV = standardized uptake value). (B) Data are shown after logarithmic transformation.

  • FIGURE 6. 
    FIGURE 6. 

    SD of 3D ROI data Embedded Image as a function of their average. (A) Data are shown in original units (SUV = standardized uptake value). (B) Data are shown after logarithmic transformation.

  • FIGURE 7. 
    FIGURE 7. 

    Example images from 3 patient studies. Images A, C, and E were acquired in 2D (105 s, 6-mm gaussian); images B, D, and F are the corresponding image slices acquired in 3D (90 s, 5-mm gaussian). The lower coefficient of variation in the 3D images can be perceived in images B, D, and F.

Back to top

In this issue

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Email Article
Citation Tools
Bookmark this article

Jump to section