Skip to main content

Main menu

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

Consistency of standardized uptake value with variation in PET reconstruction parameters

Katherine Binzel, Jun Zhang, Nathan Hall and Michael Knopp
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1976;
Katherine Binzel
1Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jun Zhang
1Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nathan Hall
1Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Knopp
1Department of Radiology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

1976

Objectives As PET/CT is increasingly being used for biomarker-like assessments, both adequate image quality and robust quantitative measurement are essential. Variations in reconstruction parameters affect both aspects and are again becoming relevant as technology evolves. We assessed and quantified how different reconstruction settings impact standardized uptake value (SUV).

Methods Using a current release time of flight system (Gemini 64 TOF PET/CT Philips) we reconstructed listmode data under all available reconstruction settings. Iterative reconstructions labeled as high quality (3 iterations, 33 subsets, 23 cm kernel width), normal (3 iterations, 33 subsets, 14.1 cm kernel width), and fast (3 iterations, 20 subsets, 14.1 cm kernel width) were evaluated. "Sharpness" was varied as the relaxation setting from a normal setting of 1, smooth of 0.7, smooth A of 0.6 to smooth B of 0.5, the smallest with the least refinement per iteration. The 12 resulting image sets per patient were analyzed, comparing changes in SUVmax for regions of interest (ROIs) drawn in target lesions as well as organ regions. A total of 11 patient studies were evaluated.

Results Using normal speed, normal sharpness as a baseline, SUVmax was found to be highest (on average 9.7% higher) for the "high quality" images reconstructed with 3 iterations, 33 subsets, 23 cm kernel width and relaxation parameter of 1, and lowest (on average 8.2% below baseline) for "fast" settings with 3 iterations, 20 subsets, 14.1 cm kernel width and relaxation parameter of 0.5. As the SUVmax increased per ROI, variance in SUV diminished, with "fast" settings becoming more consistent with baseline (on average 2.4% below), while "high quality" settings continued to increase (on average 11.3% above).

Conclusions The consistency of SUV is affected by altered reconstruction approaches such as subset settings and kernel width. While they lead to perceived improvement in image quality, the impact on SUV needs to be considered.

Research Support OSUMC Imaging Signature Progra

Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 52, Issue supplement 1
May 2011
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
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.
Consistency of standardized uptake value with variation in PET reconstruction parameters
(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
Consistency of standardized uptake value with variation in PET reconstruction parameters
Katherine Binzel, Jun Zhang, Nathan Hall, Michael Knopp
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1976;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Consistency of standardized uptake value with variation in PET reconstruction parameters
Katherine Binzel, Jun Zhang, Nathan Hall, Michael Knopp
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2011, 52 (supplement 1) 1976;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Instrumentation & Data Analysis: Image Generation

  • Resolution recovery reconstruction in Compton camera consisting of DSSD and 4 CZTs using shift-variant point spread function
  • Venous versus arterial blood samples for plasma input pharmacokinetic analysis of different radiotracer PET studies
  • Can "time of flight" reconstruction algorithms be used to reduce administered dose or acquisition time in F-18 positron emission tomography? A phantom study
Show more Instrumentation & Data Analysis: Image Generation

Image Generation Posters

  • On Enhancing Monte-Carlo Scatter Correction for Y90 Bremsstrahlung SPECT using Guided Filtering
  • Data-driven rigid motion correction of PET brain images using list mode reconstruction
  • Simultaneous Attenuation Correction and Reconstruction of PET Images Using Deep Convolutional Encoder Decoder Networks from Emission Data
Show more Image Generation Posters

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2023 Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Powered by HighWire