Abstract

Various factors have been identified that influence quantitative accuracy and image interpretation in positron emission tomography (PET). Through the continuous introduction of new PET technology—both imaging hardware and reconstruction software—into clinical care, we now find ourselves in a transition period in which traditional and new technologies coexist. The effects on the clinical value of PET imaging and its interpretation in routine clinical practice require careful reevaluation. In this review, we provide a comprehensive summary of important factors influencing quantification and interpretation with a focus on recent developments in PET technology. Finally, we discuss the relationship between quantitative accuracy and subjective image interpretation.

Highlights

  • The purpose of this review is to provide a state-of-the-art overview of factors influencing common quantitative image parameters in positron emission tomography (PET) as well as image interpretation, which is usually not quantitative

  • It has been suggested that standardized uptake values (SUV)-based criteria in lymphoma might improve inter-reader agreement because they are unaffected by visual contrast effects [188]

  • The added value of quantitative uptake parameters for clinical decisions is still not well-defined, it should be kept in mind that even simple quantitative measures such as the SUV are highly variable

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The purpose of this review is to provide a state-of-the-art overview of factors influencing common quantitative image parameters in positron emission tomography (PET) as well as image interpretation, which is usually not quantitative. PET quantification, as defined in this review article, comprises primarily those methodological factors that determine how accurately the radiopharmaceutical with its biodistribution in an individual patient is depicted. It focusses on those aspects that are potentially relevant for daily routine clinical care (Figure 1).

Patient
Partial Volume Effect
Quality Control
Acquisition Duration per Bed Position
Respiratory Motion Correction
Image Reconstruction
Specificity of the Radiopharmaceutical
Image Quality and Lesion Detection5
Injected Activity and Acquisition Time
SiPM Technology
Relationship between Objective and Subjective Image Quality
SUV: Which Parameter?
MTV: Which Delineation Method?
Inter-Reader Variability
Findings
Conclusions and Perspectives
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.