Dental artifacts in the head and neck region: implications for Dixon-based attenuation correction in PET/MR

BackgroundIn the absence of CT or traditional transmission sources in combined clinical positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) systems, MR images are used for MR-based attenuation correction (MR-AC). The susceptibility effects due to metal implants challenge MR-AC in the neck region of patients with dental implants. The purpose of this study was to assess the frequency and magnitude of subsequent PET image distortions following MR-AC.MethodsA total of 148 PET/MR patients with clear visual signal voids on the attenuation map in the dental region were included in this study. Patients were injected with [18F]-FDG, [11C]-PiB, [18F]-FET, or [64Cu]-DOTATATE. The PET/MR data were acquired over a single-bed position of 25.8 cm covering the head and neck. MR-AC was based on either standard MR-ACDIXON or MR-ACINPAINTED where the susceptibility-induced signal voids were substituted with soft tissue information. Our inpainting algorithm delineates the outer contour of signal voids breaching the anatomical volume using the non-attenuation-corrected PET image and classifies the inner air regions based on an aligned template of likely dental artifact areas. The reconstructed PET images were evaluated visually and quantitatively using regions of interests in reference regions. The volume of the artifacts and the computed relative differences in mean and max standardized uptake value (SUV) between the two PET images are reported.ResultsThe MR-based volume of the susceptibility-induced signal voids on the MR-AC attenuation maps was between 1.6 and 520.8 mL. The corresponding/resulting bias of the reconstructed tracer distribution was localized mainly in the area of the signal void. The mean and maximum SUVs averaged across all patients increased after inpainting by 52% (± 11%) and 28% (± 11%), respectively, in the corrected region. SUV underestimation decreased with the distance to the signal void and correlated with the volume of the susceptibility artifact on the MR-AC attenuation map.ConclusionsMetallic dental work may cause severe MR signal voids. The resulting PET/MR artifacts may exceed the actual volume of the dental fillings. The subsequent bias in PET is severe in regions in and near the signal voids and may affect the conspicuity of lesions in the mandibular region.

[1]  G. Delso,et al.  Performance Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  R. Wahl,et al.  From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET Response Criteria in Solid Tumors , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[3]  Ian Law,et al.  Combined PET/MR imaging in neurology: MR-based attenuation correction implies a strong spatial bias when ignoring bone , 2014, NeuroImage.

[4]  B. Schölkopf,et al.  Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques , 2009, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[5]  C. Bos,et al.  Off‐resonance suppression for multispectral MR imaging near metallic implants , 2015, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[6]  Osama Sabri,et al.  Potential Clinical Applications of PET/MR Imaging in Neurodegenerative Diseases , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[7]  Barry A Siegel,et al.  Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[8]  Tony F. Chan,et al.  Active contours without edges , 2001, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[9]  Sune H. Keller,et al.  Image artifacts from MR-based attenuation correction in clinical, whole-body PET/MRI , 2013, Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine.

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

[11]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  Positron emission tomography/computed tomography--imaging protocols, artifacts, and pitfalls. , 2004, Molecular imaging and biology : MIB : the official publication of the Academy of Molecular Imaging.

[12]  F Hofheinz,et al.  Evaluation and automatic correction of metal-implant-induced artifacts in MR-based attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MR imaging , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[13]  V. Chong,et al.  Imaging of tongue carcinoma , 2006, Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society.

[14]  Heinz-Peter Schlemmer,et al.  PET/MRI: Paving the Way for the Next Generation of Clinical Multimodality Imaging Applications , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[15]  Jiang Du,et al.  MR imaging near metal with undersampled 3D radial UTE‐MAVRIC sequences , 2013, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[16]  G Antoch,et al.  Positron emission tomography (PET) attenuation correction artefacts in PET/CT and PET/MRI. , 2013, The British journal of radiology.

[17]  Nassir Navab,et al.  Tissue Classification as a Potential Approach for Attenuation Correction in Whole-Body PET/MRI: Evaluation with PET/CT Data , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[18]  Gaspar Delso,et al.  Anatomic Evaluation of 3-Dimensional Ultrashort-Echo-Time Bone Maps for PET/MR Attenuation Correction , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[19]  Martin P. Mintchev,et al.  Improving geometric accuracy in the presence of susceptibility difference artifacts produced by metallic implants in magnetic resonance imaging , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[20]  S. Kösling,et al.  Bildgebung bei Erkrankungen des Nasopharynx , 2009, HNO.

[21]  O. Sabri,et al.  Potential Pediatric Applications of PET/MR , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  PET/MR imaging of the pelvis in the presence of endoprostheses: reducing image artifacts and increasing accuracy through inpainting , 2013, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[23]  Michael Laniado,et al.  PET/MRI in head and neck cancer: initial experience , 2012, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[24]  Brian A. Hargreaves,et al.  Accelerated slice encoding for metal artifact correction , 2010, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[25]  Flemming L. Andersen,et al.  Automatic correction of dental artifacts in PET/MRI , 2015, Journal of medical imaging.

[26]  Ian Law,et al.  PET/MRI in cancer patients: first experiences and vision from Copenhagen , 2013, Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics, Biology and Medicine.

[27]  C. Mathers,et al.  Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008 , 2010, International journal of cancer.

[28]  O. Ratib,et al.  Potential Applications of PET/MR Imaging in Cardiology , 2014, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[29]  Thomas Beyer,et al.  The future of hybrid imaging—part 2: PET/CT , 2011, Insights into imaging.

[30]  Oded Gonen,et al.  Longitudinal inter‐ and intra‐individual human brain metabolic quantification over 3 years with proton MR spectroscopy at 3 T , 2012, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[31]  Bernhard Schölkopf,et al.  MR-Based Attenuation Correction Methods for Improved PET Quantification in Lesions Within Bone and Susceptibility Artifact Regions , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.