4.6 Review

Translation of Preclinical PET Imaging Findings: Challenges and Motion Correction to Overcome the Confounding Effect of Anesthetics

Journal

FRONTIERS IN MEDICINE
Volume 8, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2021.753977

Keywords

positron emission tomography; preclinical; brain; anesthesia; motion correction

Funding

  1. ERA-NET NEURON
  2. BMBF [01EW1808]
  3. FWO
  4. Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) [1229721N, G0A8517N]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Anesthesia is a major limitation in translating preclinical brain PET scans to clinical settings, as it can affect the accuracy of tracer results. Despite advances in motion correction methods, wider adoption of this technique in brain research is needed.
Preclinical brain positron emission tomography (PET) in animals is performed using anesthesia to avoid movement during the PET scan. In contrast, brain PET scans in humans are typically performed in the awake subject. Anesthesia is therefore one of the principal limitations in the translation of preclinical brain PET to the clinic. This review summarizes the available literature supporting the confounding effect of anesthesia on several PET tracers for neuroscience in preclinical small animal scans. In a second part, we present the state-of-the-art methodologies to circumvent this limitation to increase the translational significance of preclinical research, with an emphasis on motion correction methods. Several motion tracking systems compatible with preclinical scanners have been developed, each one with its advantages and limitations. These systems and the novel experimental setups they can bring to preclinical brain PET research are reviewed here. While technical advances have been made in this field, and practical implementations have been demonstrated, the technique should become more readily available to research centers to allow for a wider adoption of the motion correction technique for brain research.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available