Positron emission tomography/computed tomography--imaging protocols, artifacts, and pitfalls.

There has been a longstanding interest in fused images of anatomical information, such as that provided by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems, with biological information obtainable by positron emission tomography (PET). The near-simultaneous data acquisition in a fixed combination of a PET and a CT scanner in a combined PET/CT imaging system minimizes spatial and temporal mismatches between the modalities by eliminating the need to move the patient in between exams. In addition, using the fast CT scan for PET attenuation correction, the duration of the examination is significantly reduced compared to standalone PET imaging with standard rod-transmission sources. The main source of artifacts arises from the use of the CT-data for scatter and attenuation correction of the PET images. Today, CT reconstruction algorithms cannot account for the presence of metal implants, such as dental fillings or prostheses, properly, thus resulting in streak artifacts, which are propagated into the PET image by the attenuation correction. The transformation of attenuation coefficients at X-ray energies to those at 511 keV works well for soft tissues, bone, and air, but again is insufficient for dense CT contrast agents, such as iodine or barium. Finally, mismatches, for example, due to uncoordinated respiration result in incorrect attenuation-corrected PET images. These artifacts, however, can be minimized or avoided prospectively by careful acquisition protocol considerations. In doubt, the uncorrected images almost always allow discrimination between true and artificial finding. PET/CT has to be integrated into the diagnostic workflow for harvesting the full potential of the new modality. In particular, the diagnostic power of both, the CT and the PET within the combination must not be underestimated. By combining multiple diagnostic studies within a single examination, significant logistic advantages can be expected if the combined PET/CT examination is to replace separate state-of-the-art PET and CT exams, thus resulting in significantly accelerated diagnostics.

[1]  N. Müller,et al.  Mediastinal nodes in bronchogenic carcinoma: comparison between CT and mediastinoscopy. , 1988, Radiology.

[2]  R. Kessler,et al.  Analysis of emission tomographic scan data: limitations imposed by resolution and background. , 1984, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[3]  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.

[4]  Johan Nuyts,et al.  Methods to monitor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with 18F-FDG PET. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  A. Buck,et al.  Head and neck imaging with PET and PET/CT: artefacts from dental metallic implants , 2002, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[6]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Design, construction and validation of a combined PET/CT tomograph for clinical oncology , 1999 .

[7]  Thomas F Hany,et al.  PET diagnostic accuracy: improvement with in-line PET-CT system: initial results. , 2002, Radiology.

[8]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Non-small cell lung cancer: dual-modality PET/CT in preoperative staging. , 2003, Radiology.

[9]  Michel Defrise,et al.  Data Acquisition and Image Reconstruction for 3D PET , 1998 .

[10]  D W. Townsend,et al.  Combined PET/CT Imaging in Oncology. Impact on Patient Management. , 2000, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

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

[12]  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.

[13]  Gerald Antoch,et al.  Focal tracer uptake: a potential artifact in contrast-enhanced dual-modality PET/CT scans. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  D. Townsend,et al.  The Theory and Practice of 3D PET , 1998, Developments in Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  C C Ling,et al.  Towards multidimensional radiotherapy (MD-CRT): biological imaging and biological conformality. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  J. Deslauriers,et al.  Clinical and surgical staging of non-small cell lung cancer. , 2000, Chest.

[17]  G. V. von Schulthess,et al.  PET/CT of the abdomen: optimizing the patient breathing pattern , 2003, European Radiology.

[18]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Dual-modality PET/CT scanning with negative oral contrast agent to avoid artifacts: introduction and evaluation. , 2004, Radiology.

[19]  J. Debatin,et al.  Effect of oral contrast agents on computed tomography-based positron emission tomography attenuation correction in dual-modality positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging. , 2003, Investigative radiology.

[20]  Cyrill Burger,et al.  Artifacts at PET and PET/CT caused by metallic hip prosthetic material. , 2003, Radiology.

[21]  Paul Kinahan,et al.  Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. , 1998, Medical physics.

[22]  W. J. Lorenz,et al.  Performance evaluation of the whole-body PET scanner ECAT EXACT HR + , 1997 .

[23]  A. Kuten,et al.  Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. , 2003, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

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