Invalidity of SUV Measurements of Lesions in Close Proximity to Hot Sources Due to "Shine-Through" Effect on FDG PET-CT Interpretation

Overview

Journal Radiol Res Pract

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Radiology

Date 2012 Oct 26

PMID 23097700

Citations 8

Authors

Yiyan Liu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

It is well known that many technical and physiologic factors can affect the reliability of the standardized uptake value (SUV) on FDG PET-CT. Another potential problem of which we may be aware but has not been previously discussed is significant SUV overestimation of lesions in the direct neighborhood of large hot sources, namely, areas with high FDG uptake or activity such as a tumor, myocardium, urinary bladder, kidney, or gastrointestinal tract. The magnitude of SUV overestimation of the lesions directly neighboring the large hot sources is varied among the different cases, and it is possibly secondary to "shine-through" effect of the hot sources, which would warrant further systematic investigation such as phantom simulation experiment. If the lesion is in the close territory of the hot source, measured SUV is often overestimated and invalid. Visual interpretation should be used for evaluation of FDG avidity of the lesion.

Citing Articles

Shine-through artifact due to high-radioactivity bladder and bowel gas in F-FDG PET/CT: impact of time-of-flight algorithm and radioactivity concentration of urine in the bladder on the occurrence of the artifacts.

Tomita Y, Ichikawa Y, Sakuma H Ann Nucl Med. 2022; 36(8):736-745.

PMID: 35635608 DOI: 10.1007/s12149-022-01756-2.

Does the beta regularization parameter of bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction always affect the quantification accuracy and image quality of positron emission tomography computed tomography?.

Wu Z, Guo B, Huang B, Zhao B, Qin Z, Hao X J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021; 22(3):224-233.

PMID: 33683004 PMC: 7984479. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13129.

Comparison of Correction Techniques for the Spill in Effect in Emission Tomography.

Akerele M, Karakatsanis N, Deidda D, Cal-Gonzalez J, Forsythe R, Dweck M IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2021; 4(4):422-432.

PMID: 33542967 PMC: 7116684. DOI: 10.1109/TRPMS.2020.2980443.

Assessment of different quantification metrics of [F]-NaF PET/CT images of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Akerele M, Mushari N, Forsythe R, Syed M, Karakatsanis N, Newby D J Nucl Cardiol. 2020; 29(1):251-261.

PMID: 32557152 PMC: 8873073. DOI: 10.1007/s12350-020-02220-2.

Validation of the physiological background correction method for the suppression of the spill-in effect near highly radioactive regions in positron emission tomography.

Akerele M, Wadhwa P, Silva-Rodriguez J, Hallett W, Tsoumpas C EJNMMI Phys. 2018; 5(1):34.

PMID: 30519974 PMC: 6281548. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-018-0233-8.

References

Ueda K, Suga K, Kaneda Y, Sakano H, Tanaka T, Hayashi M . Radioisotope lymph node mapping in nonsmall cell lung cancer: can it be applicable for sentinel node biopsy?. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004; 77(2):426-30. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-4975(03)01351-1. View

Wu C, Morita E, Treseler P, Esserman L, Hwang E, Kuerer H . Failure to harvest sentinel lymph nodes identified by preoperative lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer patients. Breast J. 2003; 9(2):86-90. DOI: 10.1046/j.1524-4741.2003.09205.x. View

Liu Y, Chun K, Freeman L . 'Shine through' on dual tracer parathyroid scintigraphy: a potential pitfall in interpretation. Clin Nucl Med. 2005; 30(3):145-9. DOI: 10.1097/00003072-200503000-00001. View

Motomura K, Noguchi A, Hashizume T, Hasegawa Y, Komoike Y, Inaji H . Usefulness of a solid-state gamma camera for sentinel node identification in patients with breast cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2004; 89(1):12-7. DOI: 10.1002/jso.20162. View

Acton P, Zhuang H, Alavi A . Quantification in PET. Radiol Clin North Am. 2004; 42(6):1055-62, viii. DOI: 10.1016/j.rcl.2004.08.010. View

Thie J . Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage. J Nucl Med. 2004; 45(9):1431-4. View

Boellaard R, Krak N, Hoekstra O, Lammertsma A . Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J Nucl Med. 2004; 45(9):1519-27. View

Tomasi G, Turkheimer F, Aboagye E . Importance of quantification for the analysis of PET data in oncology: review of current methods and trends for the future. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011; 14(2):131-46. DOI: 10.1007/s11307-011-0514-2. View

Keyes Jr J . SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value?. J Nucl Med. 1995; 36(10):1836-9. View

10.

Tonouchi H, Mohri Y, Tanaka K, Kobayashi M, Ohmori Y, Kusunoki M . Laparoscopic lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsies for early-stage gastric cancer: the cause of false negativity. World J Surg. 2005; 29(4):418-21. DOI: 10.1007/s00268-004-7732-6. View

11.

Liu Y, Ghesani N, Zuckier L . Physiology and pathophysiology of incidental findings detected on FDG-PET scintigraphy. Semin Nucl Med. 2010; 40(4):294-315. DOI: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2010.02.002. View

12.

Adams M, Turkington T, Wilson J, Wong T . A systematic review of the factors affecting accuracy of SUV measurements. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010; 195(2):310-20. DOI: 10.2214/AJR.10.4923. View

13.

Hsueh , Giuliano . Sentinel Lymph Node Technique for Staging of Breast Cancer. Oncologist. 1999; 3(3):165-170. View

14.

Boellaard R . Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50 Suppl 1:11S-20S. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.057182. View

15.

Cox C, Haddad F, Bass S, Cox J, Ku N, BERMAN C . Lymphatic mapping in the treatment of breast cancer. Oncology (Williston Park). 1998; 12(9):1283-92; discussion 1293-4, 1297-8. View

16.

Lodge M, Chaudhry M, Udall D, Wahl R . Characterization of a perirectal artifact in 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51(10):1501-6. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.110.079145. View

17.

Huang S . Anatomy of SUV. Standardized uptake value. Nucl Med Biol. 2000; 27(7):643-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0969-8051(00)00155-4. View