4.1 Article

Investigation of 18F-FDG 3D mode PET image quality versus acquisition time

Journal

NUCLEAR MEDICINE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages 254-259

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e3283355c5d

Keywords

acquisition time; image quality; positron emission tomography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective Three-dimensional (3D) mode positron emission tomography (PET) is being used increasingly for clinical PET imaging. However, as yet, optimal acquisition parameters have not been established. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of varying acquisition time on 3D image quality using standard clinical activities of F-18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG). Methods F-18-FDG phantom and patient PET images were acquired with varying acquisition times on a GE Discovery-STE PET/CT system. The NEMA Image-Quality phantom was imaged with four hot lesions in a uniform background. Images were acquired for 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-min frames with three different lesion-to-background contrast ratios. Patient data were investigated using list mode acquisition to obtain comparable 2, 3, and 4-min frames. Qualitative analysis involved grading image quality and lesion detectability. Quantitative analysis of phantom images involved assessing the coefficient of variation (COV) of background areas as a measure of noise, and lesion over background variability as a measure of image quality. Patient data were also assessed using COV analysis of liver uptake. Results Qualitative and quantitative analysis showed no significant difference in image quality between 4 and 5-min acquisition frames for 3D mode F-18-FDG PET imaging with standard clinical activities. The observers noted no difference in perceived image quality. This finding was supported by COV analysis. Conclusion This study shows that GE Discovery-STE acquisition frame time can be reduced to 3 min for standard 3D mode imaging at standard clinical activities of F-18-FDG. Nucl Med Commun 31: 254-259 (C) 2010 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available