Comparison of alignment of computer-registered data sets: combined PET/CT versus independent PET and CT of the thorax.

PURPOSE To retrospectively determine whether alignment of registered positron emission tomographic (PET) and computed tomographic (CT) data sets obtained independently varies significantly from alignment of data sets acquired from a combined PET/CT scanner. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study was approved by the institution's Human Research Committee with a waiver of informed consent and complied with HIPAA. Whole-body combined PET/CT data sets and separate routinely positioned thoracic CT data sets were obtained from 12 patients (six men, six women; mean age, 48.6 years; range, 24-62 years). Separate PET and thoracic CT data sets matched for patient positioning and respiration were acquired on the same day for nine patients (four men, five women; mean age, 71 years; range, 51-90 years). Computer nonlinear registration was performed on PET and CT data sets from combined PET/CT (fusion group 1), PET data sets from combined PET/CT with unmatched thoracic CT (fusion group 2), and data sets from separate PET and CT matched for patient positioning and respiration (fusion group 3). Quality of alignment was assessed by two radiologists in consensus blinded to the source of registered data in each fusion group at the following anatomic locations: diaphragm, aortic arch, heart, thoracic spine, and lung apices. Results were compared by using the Wilcoxon paired signed rank and unpaired rank sum tests. RESULTS Quality of alignment did not significantly differ between fusion group 1 and fusion group 3. Fusion group 1 provided significantly better alignment in two of five anatomic locations (P = .008 for diaphragm and P = .031 for heart) than fusion group 2. Fusion group 3 provided significantly better alignment in two of five anatomic locations (P = .037 for diaphragm and P = .009 for heart) than fusion group 2. CONCLUSION Thoracic anatomic alignment does not significantly differ between registered PET and CT data sets acquired on a combined PET/CT scanner or from separate PET and CT scanners obtained on the same day when carefully matched for anatomic positioning and respiration.

[1]  Cyrill Burger,et al.  PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration , 2002, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[2]  J. Mazziotta,et al.  MRI‐PET Registration with Automated Algorithm , 1993, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[3]  G. V. von Schulthess,et al.  Staging of non-small-cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  V. Lowe,et al.  Current role of positron emission tomography in thoracic oncology , 1998, Thorax.

[5]  David R. Haynor,et al.  PET-CT image registration in the chest using free-form deformations , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  C. Ng,et al.  Histopathological correlates of abnormal pericolic fat on CT in the assessment of colorectal carcinoma. , 2002, The British journal of radiology.

[7]  David W Townsend,et al.  PET/CT today and tomorrow. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[8]  N. Alpert,et al.  FDG-PET in oncology: there's more to it than looking at pictures. , 1993, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology , 2003, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[10]  Richard L Wahl,et al.  Why nearly all PET of abdominal and pelvic cancers will be performed as PET/CT. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  Piotr J Slomka,et al.  Software Approach to Merging Molecular with Anatomic Information , 2004 .

[12]  Heiko Schöder,et al.  PET/CT in oncology: integration into clinical management of lymphoma, melanoma, and gastrointestinal malignancies. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[13]  Rainer Schrader,et al.  Fast and robust registration of PET and MR images of human brain , 2004, NeuroImage.

[14]  Improved Radiologic Staging of Lung Cancer with 2-[18F]-Fluoro-2-Deoxy-d-Glucose–Positron Emission Tomography and Computed Tomography Registration , 2003, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[15]  S. Weise,et al.  Improved image interpretation with registered thoracic CT and positron emission tomography data sets. , 2002, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/CT imaging. , 2004, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  P. Anandan,et al.  Hierarchical Model-Based Motion Estimation , 1992, ECCV.

[18]  Michael E Phelps,et al.  Positron emission tomography scanning: current and future applications. , 2002, Annual review of medicine.

[19]  Ralph Myers,et al.  The application of PET-MR image registration in the brain. , 2002, The British journal of radiology.