nach oben

Erschienen in:

14.11.2023 | Original Article

Reduced count pediatric whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET imaging reconstruction with a Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm

verfasst von: Vinicius de Padua V Alves, Nadeen Abu Ata, Joseph MacLean, Susan E. Sharp, Yinan Li, Samuel Brady, Andrew T. Trout

Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology | Ausgabe 1/2024

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Advanced positron emission tomography (PET) image reconstruction methods promise to allow optimized PET/CT protocols with improved image quality, decreased administered activity and/or acquisition times.

Objective

To evaluate the impact of reducing counts (simulating reduced acquisition time) in block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) reconstructed pediatric whole-body ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET images, and to compare BSERM with ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstructed reduced-count images.

Materials and methods

Twenty children (16 male) underwent clinical whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT examinations using a 25-cm axial field-of-view (FOV) digital PET/CT system at 90 s per bed (s/bed) with BSREM reconstruction (β=700). Reduced count simulations with varied BSREM β levels were generated from list-mode data: 60 s/bed, β=800; 50 s/bed, β=900; 40 s/bed, β=1000; and 30 s/bed, β=1300. In addition, a single OSEM reconstruction was created at 60 s/bed based on prior literature. Qualitative (Likert scores) and quantitative (standardized uptake value [SUV]) analyses were performed to evaluate image quality and quantitation across simulated reconstructions.

Results

The mean patient age was 9.0 ± 5.5 (SD) years, mean weight was 38.5 ± 24.5 kg, and mean administered ¹⁸F-FDG activity was 4.5 ± 0.7 (SD) MBq/kg. Between BSREM reconstructions, no qualitative measure showed a significant difference versus the 90 s/bed β=700 standard (all P>0.05). SUV_max values for lesions were significantly lower from 90 s/bed, β=700 only at a simulated acquisition time of 30 s/bed, β=1300 (P=0.001). In a side-by-side comparison of BSREM versus OSEM reconstructions, 40 s/bed, β=1000 images were generally preferred over 60 s/bed TOF OSEM images.

Conclusion

In children who undergo whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT on a 25-cm FOV digital PET/CT scanner, reductions in acquisition time or, by corollary, administered radiopharmaceutical activity of >50% from a clinical standard of 90 s/bed may be possible while maintaining diagnostic quality when a BSREM reconstruction algorithm is used.

Graphical Abstract

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Treves ST, Gelfand MJ, Fahey FH, Parisi MT (2016) 2016 update of the North American consensus guidelines for pediatric administered radiopharmaceutical activities. J Nucl Med 57:15N-18NPubMed

Vali R, Alessio A, Balza R et al (2021) SNMMI procedure standard/EANM practice guideline on pediatric 18F-FDG PET/CT for oncology 1.0. J Nucl Med 62:99–110CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Alves V de PV, Brady S, Ata NA et al (2022) Simulated reduced-count whole-body FDG PET: evaluation in children and young adults imaged on a digital PET scanner. American Journal of Roentgenology. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.22.27894

Qi Z, Gates EL, O’Brien MM, Trout AT (2018) Radiation dose reduction through combining positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and diagnostic CT in children and young adults with lymphoma. Pediatr Radiol 48:196–203CrossRefPubMed

Schmall JP, Surti S, Otero HJ et al (2021) Investigating low-dose image quality in whole-body pediatric 18F-FDG scans using time-of-flight PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 62:123–130CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

López-Mora DA, Carrió I, Flotats A (2021) Digital PET vs analog PET: clinical implications? Semin Nucl Med 302–311. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2021.10.004

Lasnon C, Coudrais N, Houdu B et al (2020) How fast can we scan patients with modern (digital) PET/CT systems? Eur J Radiol 129:109144CrossRefPubMed

Lindström E, Sundin A, Trampal C et al (2018) Evaluation of penalized-likelihood estimation reconstruction on a digital time-of-flight PET/CT scanner for 18 F-FDG whole-body examinations. J Nucl Med 59:1152–1158CrossRefPubMed

Caribé PRRV, Koole M, D’Asseler Y et al (2019) Noise reduction using a Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm on a time-of-flight PET-CT scanner. EJNMMI Phys 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-019-0264-9

10.

Ross S. (2014) Q.Clear. GE Healthcare, White Paper

11.

Zhang YQ, Hu PC, Wu RZ et al (2020) The image quality, lesion detectability, and acquisition time of 18F-FDG total-body PET/CT in oncological patients. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 47:2507–2515CrossRefPubMed

12.

Zucchetta P, Branchini M, Zorz A et al (2019) Quantitative analysis of image metrics for reduced and standard dose pediatric 18F-FDG PET/MRI examinations. Br J Radiol 92:22–25CrossRef

13.

Alves VPV, Brady S, Ata NA et al (2022) Simulated reduced-count whole-body FDG PET: evaluation in children and young adults imaged on a digital PET scanner. Am J Roentgenol 219:952–961CrossRef

14.

Shkumat NA, Vali R, Shammas A (2020) Clinical evaluation of reconstruction and acquisition time for pediatric 18F-FDG brain PET using digital PET/CT. Pediatr Radiol 50:966–972CrossRefPubMed

15.

Phelps AS, Naeger DM, Courtier JL et al (2015) Pairwise comparison versus Likert scale for biomedical image assessment. Am J Roentgenol 204:8–14CrossRef

16.

Tian D, Yang H, Li Y et al (2022) The effect of Q.Clear reconstruction on quantification and spatial resolution of 18F-FDG PET in simultaneous PET/MR. EJNMMI Phys 9:1–12CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Liberini V, Pizzuto DA, Messerli M et al (2022) BSREM for brain metastasis detection with 18F-FDG-PET/CT in lung cancer patients. J Digit Imaging 35:581–593CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Kertész H, Beyer T, London K et al (2021) Reducing radiation exposure to paediatric patients undergoing [18F]FDG-PET/CT imaging. Mol Imaging Biol 23:775–786CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Miwa K, Yoshii T, Wagatsuma K et al (2023) Impact of γ factor in the penalty function of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction (Q.Clear) to achieve high-resolution PET images. EJNMMI Phys 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-023-00527-w

20.

Liberini V, Messerli M, Husmann L et al (2021) Improved detection of in-transit metastases of malignant melanoma with BSREM reconstruction in digital [18F]FDG PET/CT. Eur Radiol 31:8011–8020CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

21.

Wyrzykowski M, Siminiak N, Kaźmierczak M et al (2020) Impact of the Q.Clear reconstruction algorithm on the interpretation of PET/CT images in patients with lymphoma. EJNMMI Res 10:4–11CrossRef

22.

Cheng DW, Ersahin D, Staib LH et al (2014) Using SUV as a guide to 18F-FDG dose reduction. J Nucl Med 55:1998–2002CrossRefPubMed

23.

Gatidis S, Schmidt H, la Fougère C et al (2016) Defining optimal tracer activities in pediatric oncologic whole-body 18F-FDG-PET/MRI. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 43:2283–2289CrossRefPubMed

24.

Surti S, Viswanath V, Daube-Witherspoon ME et al (2020) Benefit of improved performance with state-of-the art digital PET/CT for lesion detection in oncology. J Nucl Med 61:1684–1690CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Reduced count pediatric whole-body 18F-FDG PET imaging reconstruction with a Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm
verfasst von: Vinicius de Padua V Alves
Nadeen Abu Ata
Joseph MacLean
Susan E. Sharp
Yinan Li
Samuel Brady
Andrew T. Trout
Publikationsdatum: 14.11.2023
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Pediatric Radiology / Ausgabe 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05801-8

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar "Urologie und Sexualmedizin in der Praxis"

Springer Medizin

Reduced count pediatric whole-body ¹⁸F-FDG PET imaging reconstruction with a Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm