Influence of the resolution mode on mean and maximum SUV for PET images acquired by a LabPET SOLO 4 scanner

Authors

  • João Vitor do Carmo Barbosa Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear
  • Guilherme Cavalcante Albuquerque de Souza Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear
  • Rodrigo Modesto Gadelha Gontijo Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
  • Bruno Melo Mendes Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear
  • Andrea Vidal Ferreira Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15392/2319-0612.2023.2273

Keywords:

LabPET SOLO 4, Resolution Mode, Standardized Uptake Value

Abstract

In preclinical PET, SUV (standardized uptake value) is a robust quantifier that can be used to analyze PET images. Several factors – biological or technical – can affect SUV determination. Among technical factors, it is possible to cite the reconstruction protocols of PET images. This work evaluated the influence of two resolution modes – standard and high – on mean and maximum SUVs. The PET image of a mouse with a tumor in left flank was chosen from a PET image bank and reconstructed using two different protocols varying the resolution mode. The post-processing of images was performed using AMIDE software and eight volumes of interest (VOIs) were defined. Qualitatively, there was light improvement in structures definition in high-resolution image compared to standard resolution image. At the semiquantitative analysis, image reconstruction protocols using high-resolution mode did not significantly improve the recuperation of radiopharmaceutical uptake into analyzed tissues.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

TAN, L. T.; Ong, K. L. Semi-quantitative Measurements of Normal Organs with Variable Metabolic Activity on FDG PET imaging. Ann Acad Med Singapore, v. 33, p. 183–185, 2011.

GONTIJO, R. M. G.; FERREIRA, A. V.; SOUZA, G. C. A.; MENDES, B. M.; SILVA, J. B.; MAMEDE, M. Image quality evaluation of a small animal PET scanner. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, v. 08-02, p. 01–13, 2020.

BARBOSA J. V. C.; GONTIJO, R. M. G.; SOUZA, G. C. A.; MENDES, B. M.; SILVA, J. B.; MAMEDEB, M.; FERREIRA, A.V. Influence of image reconstruction protocols on the image quality of a small animal PET scanner using 18F and 11C. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, v. 09-03, p. 01–19, 2019.

NEMA-National ElectricalManufacturers Association. Performance Measurements of Small Animal PET, Rosslyn VA; Standards Publication NU 4-2008, 2008.

OIKONEN, V. Standardized uptake value (SUV), Turku Pet Centre. Turku, Finland. 2020. Available at: <http://www.turkupetcentre.net/petanalysis/model_suv.html>. Last accessed: 18 Jan. 2022.

ADAMS, M. C.; TURKINGTON, T. G.; WILSON, J. M.; WONG, T. Z. A Systematic Review of the Factors Affecting Accuracy of SUV Measurements. American Journal of Roentgenology, v. 195, n. 2, p. 310–320, 2010.

BRENDLE, C.; KUPFERSCHLÄGER, J.; NIKOLAOUA, K.; FOUGÈRE, C.; GATIDIS, S.; PFANNENBERGA, C. Is the standard uptake value (SUV) appropriate for quantification in clinical PET imaging? – Variability induced by different SUV measurements and varying reconstruction methods. European Journal of Radiology. v. 84, n. 1, p. 158-162, 2015.

SAHA, G. B. Basics of PET Imaging: Physics, Chemistry, and Regulations, 2th ed., Springer New York, NY, 2010. p. 83-84.

Downloads

Published

2023-08-24

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Influence of the resolution mode on mean and maximum SUV for PET images acquired by a LabPET SOLO 4 scanner. Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, v. 11, n. 3, p. 1–11, 2023. DOI: 10.15392/2319-0612.2023.2273. Disponível em: https://bjrs.org.br/revista/index.php/REVISTA/article/view/2273.. Acesso em: 21 nov. 2024.

Similar Articles

1-10 of 338

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>