Impact of CT and 137 Cs Attenuation Correction on the Quality and Standardized Uptake Value of PET Imaging

Kemin Huang,Xueling He,Yuanming Feng,Wen Guanghua,Fei Yu,Dejun Liu,Jiangang Yuan,Ming Yang
2008-01-01
Abstract:Objective The imaging quality of PET images varies with different attenuation correc-tion (AC) methodology. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact to the PET image quality and standardized uptake value (SUV) with CT and 137Cs AC (CTAC and CsAC) and to compare image quality with and without AC (NOAC). Methods Jaszczak phantom with smallest inserts and 30 patients were studied on the Gemini PET/CT system. CTAC, CsAC and NOAC PET images were reconstructed respec-tively. The image special resolution, uniformity and average SUV from the phantom studies were compared. The max and rain non-uniformity ( Nui ) of each image were calculated for the uniformity regions of the phantom images with both CTAC and CSAC. Regions of interest (ROIs) of the normal soft tissue, bone, high 18F-fluorodeoxyglueose (FDG) uptake regions and the basic remains were drawn, then the ROIs and image quality from the CTAC images were compared with those of the CsAC images. SPSS 12.0 was used for the paired t-test and Pearson analysis. Results There was no obviously difference of image spatial resolu-tion found between the CTAC and CsAC phantom studies. The image uniformity of the CTAC images was better than that of the CsAC ones [Nut values were (19±1) %-(23±2)%, (23±2)%-(29±3)% re-spectively], although the average SUVs had no statistical difference [(0.9±0.1) vs (1.0±0.1);t=0.367, P=0.719]. For the patient studies, SUV also showed no statistical difference between the CTAC and CsAC methods, in the normal tissues and high 11F-FDG uptake regions[(0.71±0.20) vs (0.75±0.23), t=-2.159, P=0.054;(5.50±4.80) vs (5.70±5.00), t=-2. 032, P=0.054]. The aver-age SUVs of CTAC images was objectively higher than that of the CsAC ones in bone and high density re-gions [(1.37±0.29) vs (1.18±0.36), t =7.960, P=0.001;(1.82±0.62) vs (0.92±0.20), t=3.451, P=0.018]. There was no significant difference in the image quality found in normal soft tissue, bone and high FDG uptake regions between CTAC and CsAC. Imaging artifacts were found only in the high density regions with CTAC method. Conclusion This study showed the image uniformity with CTAC was better, while the spatial resolution was similar between CTAC and CsAC images, and both better than NOAC images. Key words: Tomography, emission-computed; Image progressing, computed-assisted; Quality control
What problem does this paper attempt to address?