SUV: From Silly Useless Value to Smart Uptake Value

One of the early promises of PET was that it would be quantitative (1), as opposed to imaging modalities such as x-ray CT, MRI, or SPECT, in which quantification is more of a challenge than in PET. By quantitative is meant that a raw PET signal can be transferred into absolute activity concentrations of the radiopharmaceutical in all tissues in units of, for example, kBq/cm3. In this sense, PET can be classified as quantitative molecular imaging, since it provides the absolute number of radioactive molecules in each desired volume, whether this be a single image voxel or a larger volume of interest. Once the specific activity of the radiopharmaceutical is known,

[1]  Daniel A Low,et al.  A novel PET tumor delineation method based on adaptive region-growing and dual-front active contours. , 2008, Medical physics.

[2]  Di Yan,et al.  Defining a radiotherapy target with positron emission tomography. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  I. Buvat,et al.  Comparative Assessment of Methods for Estimating Tumor Volume and Standardized Uptake Value in 18F-FDG PET , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[4]  L. Adler,et al.  Simultaneous recovery of size and radioactivity concentration of small spheroids with PET data. , 1999, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[5]  J. Keyes.  SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? , 1995, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[6]  Abbes Amira,et al.  Fully automated segmentation of oncological PET volumes using a combined multiscale and statistical model. , 2007, Medical physics.

[7]  Christian Roux,et al.  A Fuzzy Locally Adaptive Bayesian Segmentation Approach for Volume Determination in PET , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  C. Rübe,et al.  Comparison of different methods for delineation of 18F-FDG PET-positive tissue for target volume definition in radiotherapy of patients with non-Small cell lung cancer. , 2005, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  Anne Bol,et al.  A gradient-based method for segmenting FDG-PET images: methodology and validation , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[10]  H. Zaidi,et al.  Quantitative Analysis in Nuclear Medicine Imaging , 2007, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  Quantitative Analysis in Nuclear Medicine Imaging , 2006 .

[12]  I. Buvat,et al.  Partial-Volume Effect in PET Tumor Imaging* , 2007, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[13]  S M Larson,et al.  Segmentation of lung lesion volume by adaptive positron emission tomography image thresholding , 1997, Cancer.

[14]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials , 2008, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[15]  S. Cherry,et al.  Physics in Nuclear Medicine , 2004 .

[16]  R. Francis,et al.  Semiautomatic volume of interest drawing for 18F-FDG image analysis—method and preliminary results , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.