International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2020
New Data-Driven Gated PET/CT Free of Misregistration Artifacts.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pan Tinsu, Lu Yang, Thomas M Allan, Liao Zhongxing, Luo Dershan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: We developed a new data-driven gated (DDG) positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) to improve the registration of CT and DDG PET.
METHODS: We acquired 10 repeat PET/CT and 35 cine CT scans for the mitigation of misregistration between CT and PET data. We also derived end-expiration phase CT as DDG CT for attenuation correction of DDG PET. Radiation exposure, body mass index (BMI), scan coverage, and effective radiation dose were compared between repeat PET/CT and cine CT. Of the 35 cine CT patients, 14 (capturing 59 total tumors) were compared among average PET/CT (baseline PET attenuation correction by average CT), DDG PET (DDG PET attenuation correction by baseline CT), and DDG PET/CT (DDG PET attenuation correction by DDG CT) for registration and quantification without increasing the scan time for DDG PET.
RESULTS: Compared with repeat PET/CT, cine CT had significantly lower scan coverage (32.5 ± 11.5 cm vs 15.4 ± 4.7 cm; P < .001) and effective radiation dose (3.7 ± 2.6 mSv vs 1.3 ± 0.6 mSv; P < .01). Repeat PET/CT and cine CT did not differ significantly in BMI or radiation exposure (P > .1). Cine CT saved the scan time for not needing a repeat PET. The SUV ratios of average PET/CT, DDG PET, and DDG PET/CT to baseline PET/CT were 1.14 ± 0.28, 1.28 ± 0.20, and 1.63 ± 0.64, respectively (P < .0001), suggesting that the SUVmax increased consecutively from baseline PET/CT to average PET/CT, DDG PET, and DDG PET/CT. Motion correction with DDG PET had a larger impact on quantification than registration improvement with average CT did. The biggest improvement in quantification was from DDG PET/CT, in which both registration was improved and motion was mitigated.
CONCLUSION: Our new DDG PET/CT approach alleviates misregistration artifacts and, compared with DDG PET, improves quantification and registration. The use of cine CT in our DDG PET/CT method also reduces the effective radiation dose and scan coverage compared with repeat CT.
METHODS: We acquired 10 repeat PET/CT and 35 cine CT scans for the mitigation of misregistration between CT and PET data. We also derived end-expiration phase CT as DDG CT for attenuation correction of DDG PET. Radiation exposure, body mass index (BMI), scan coverage, and effective radiation dose were compared between repeat PET/CT and cine CT. Of the 35 cine CT patients, 14 (capturing 59 total tumors) were compared among average PET/CT (baseline PET attenuation correction by average CT), DDG PET (DDG PET attenuation correction by baseline CT), and DDG PET/CT (DDG PET attenuation correction by DDG CT) for registration and quantification without increasing the scan time for DDG PET.
RESULTS: Compared with repeat PET/CT, cine CT had significantly lower scan coverage (32.5 ± 11.5 cm vs 15.4 ± 4.7 cm; P < .001) and effective radiation dose (3.7 ± 2.6 mSv vs 1.3 ± 0.6 mSv; P < .01). Repeat PET/CT and cine CT did not differ significantly in BMI or radiation exposure (P > .1). Cine CT saved the scan time for not needing a repeat PET. The SUV ratios of average PET/CT, DDG PET, and DDG PET/CT to baseline PET/CT were 1.14 ± 0.28, 1.28 ± 0.20, and 1.63 ± 0.64, respectively (P < .0001), suggesting that the SUVmax increased consecutively from baseline PET/CT to average PET/CT, DDG PET, and DDG PET/CT. Motion correction with DDG PET had a larger impact on quantification than registration improvement with average CT did. The biggest improvement in quantification was from DDG PET/CT, in which both registration was improved and motion was mitigated.
CONCLUSION: Our new DDG PET/CT approach alleviates misregistration artifacts and, compared with DDG PET, improves quantification and registration. The use of cine CT in our DDG PET/CT method also reduces the effective radiation dose and scan coverage compared with repeat CT.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
ArtifactsBody Mass IndexData ScienceExhalationFluorodeoxyglucose F18Gallium RadioisotopesHumansLiver NeoplasmsLung NeoplasmsOrgan MotionOrganometallic CompoundsPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPositron-Emission TomographyRadiation ExposureRadiotherapy DosageRespiratory MechanicsTime FactorsTomography, X-Ray Computed