| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Original Research |
1 Department of Imaging Physics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer
Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Box 56, Houston, TX 77030.
2 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson
Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030.
OBJECTIVES. The use of IV contrast media in PET/CT can result in an overestimation of PET attenuation factors that potentially can affect interpretation. The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of IV contrast media in PET/CT and assess its impact on patients with intrathoracic malignancies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. Nine patients had CTs performed with and without IV contrast media followed by 18F-FDG PET. PET images were reconstructed using contrast-enhanced and unenhanced CT. To quantify the effect of contrast media on standardized uptake values (SUV), similar regions of interest (ROIs) were drawn on the subclavian vein, heart, liver, spleen, and site of malignancy on both CT and corresponding reconstructed PET images, and the mean and maximum values were compared. In addition, two physicians blinded to the imaging parameters that were used evaluated the reconstructed PET images to assess whether IV contrast media had an effect on clinical interpretation.
RESULTS. For all patient studies, the subclavian vein region on the ipsilateral side of contrast media administration had the highest increase in CT numbers with a corresponding average SUVmax increase of 27.1%. Similarly, ROIs of the heart and at the site of malignancy showed an increase in the maximum attenuation value with a corresponding average SUVmax increase of 16.7% and 8.4%, respectively. Other locations had relatively small attenuation value differences with a correspondingly negligible SUV variation.
CONCLUSION. Although there is a significant increase in SUV in regions of high-contrast concentration when contrast-enhanced CT is used for attenuation correction, this increase is clinically insignificant. Accordingly, in PET/CT, IV contrast-enhanced CT can be used in combination with the PET to evaluate patients with cancer.
Keywords: artifact • attenuation • contrast media • PET/CT
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  R. Boellaard Standards for PET Image Acquisition and Quantitative Data Analysis J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2009; 50(Suppl_1): 11S - 20S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Martinez-Moller, M. Souvatzoglou, G. Delso, R. A. Bundschuh, C. Chefd'hotel, S. I. Ziegler, N. Navab, M. Schwaiger, and S. G. Nekolla Tissue Classification as a Potential Approach for Attenuation Correction in Whole-Body PET/MRI: Evaluation with PET/CT Data J. Nucl. Med., April 1, 2009; 50(4): 520 - 526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Allen-Auerbach and W. A. Weber Measuring Response with FDG-PET: Methodological Aspects Oncologist, April 1, 2009; 14(4): 369 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Badiee, B. L. Franc, E. M. Webb, B. Chu, R. A. Hawkins, and F. Coakley Role of IV Iodinated Contrast Material in 18F-FDG PET/CT of Liver Metastases Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2008; 191(5): 1436 - 1439. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. L. Elstrom, J. P. Leonard, M. Coleman, and R. K. J. Brown Combined PET and low-dose, noncontrast CT scanning obviates the need for additional diagnostic contrast-enhanced CT scans in patients undergoing staging or restaging for lymphoma Ann. Onc., October 1, 2008; 19(10): 1770 - 1773. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. W. Townsend Dual-Modality Imaging: Combining Anatomy and Function J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2008; 49(6): 938 - 955. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. J. Gollub, R. Hong, D. M. Sarasohn, and T. Akhurst Limitations of CT During PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1583 - 1591. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Buther, L. Stegger, M. Dawood, F. Range, M. Schafers, R. Fischbach, T. Wichter, O. Schober, and K. P Schafers Effective Methods to Correct Contrast Agent-Induced Errors in PET Quantification in Cardiac PET/CT J. Nucl. Med., July 1, 2007; 48(7): 1060 - 1068. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Z. Wong, E. K. Paulson, R. C. Nelson, E. F. Patz Jr., and R. E. Coleman Practical Approach to Diagnostic CT Combined with PET Am. J. Roentgenol., March 1, 2007; 188(3): 622 - 629. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. A. Weber and R. Figlin Monitoring Cancer Treatment with PET/CT: Does It Make a Difference? J. Nucl. Med., January 1, 2007; 48(1_suppl): 36S - 44S. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Brechtel and T. Beyer Reply: Adequate Evaluation of Image Registration in Hybrid PET/CT. J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2006; 47(9): 1557 - 1558. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
