A Comparison of CT- and MR-based Attenuation Correction in Neurological PET

Overview

Journal Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging

Specialties Biophysics
Nuclear Medicine
Radiology

Date 2014 Jan 16

PMID 24425423

Citations 32

Authors

John C Dickson

Celia OMeara

Anna Barnes

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To assess the quantitative accuracy of current MR attenuation correction (AC) methods in neurological PET, in comparison to data derived using CT AC.

Methods: This retrospective study included 25 patients who were referred for a neurological FDG PET examination and were imaged sequentially by PET/CT and simultaneous PET/MR. Differences between activity concentrations derived using Dixon and ultrashort echo time (UTE) MR-based AC and those derived from CT AC were compared using volume of interest and voxel-based approaches. The same comparisons were also made using PET data represented as SUV ratios (SUVr) using grey matter cerebellum as the reference region.

Results: Extensive and statistically significant regional underestimations of activity concentrations were found with both Dixon AC (P < 0.001) and UTE AC (P < 0.001) in all brain regions when compared to CT AC. The greatest differences were found in the cortical grey matter (Dixon AC 21.3%, UTE AC 15.7%) and cerebellum (Dixon AC 19.8%, UTE AC 17.3%). The underestimation using UTE AC was significantly less than with Dixon AC (P < 0.001) in most regions. Voxel-based comparisons showed that all cortical grey matter and cerebellum uptake was underestimated with Dixon AC compared to CT AC. Using UTE AC the extent and significance of these differences were reduced. Inaccuracies in cerebellar activity concentrations led to a mixture of predominantly cortical underestimation and subcortical overestimation in SUVr PET data for both MR AC methodologies.

Conclusion: MR-based AC results in significant underestimation of activity concentrations throughout the brain, which makes the use of SUVr data difficult. These effects limit the quantitative accuracy of neurological PET/MR.

Citing Articles

Oxygen extraction fraction is not uniform in human brain: a positron emission tomography study.

Ito H, Ibaraki M, Yamakuni R, Hakozaki M, Ukon N, Ishii S J Physiol Sci. 2023; 73(1):25.

PMID: 37828449 PMC: 10717292. DOI: 10.1186/s12576-023-00880-6.

A review of PET attenuation correction methods for PET-MR.

Krokos G, MacKewn J, Dunn J, Marsden P EJNMMI Phys. 2023; 10(1):52.

PMID: 37695384 PMC: 10495310. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-023-00569-0.

DeepDixon synthetic CT for [ PET/MRI attenuation correction of post-surgery glioma patients with metal implants.

Ladefoged C, Andersen F, Andersen T, Anderberg L, Engkebolle C, Madsen K Front Neurosci. 2023; 17:1142383.

PMID: 37090806 PMC: 10115992. DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1142383.

Deep learning for Dixon MRI-based attenuation correction in PET/MRI of head and neck cancer patients.

Olin A, Hansen A, Rasmussen J, Jakoby B, Berthelsen A, Ladefoged C EJNMMI Phys. 2022; 9(1):20.

PMID: 35294629 PMC: 8927520. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-022-00449-z.

Deep-learning-based attenuation correction in dynamic [O]HO studies using PET/MRI in healthy volunteers.

Puig O, Henriksen O, Andersen F, Lindberg U, Hojgaard L, Law I J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2021; 41(12):3314-3323.

PMID: 34250821 PMC: 8669198. DOI: 10.1177/0271678X211029178.

References

Sled J, Zijdenbos A, Evans A . A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1998; 17(1):87-97. DOI: 10.1109/42.668698. View

Catana C, Benner T, van der Kouwe A, Byars L, Hamm M, Chonde D . MRI-assisted PET motion correction for neurologic studies in an integrated MR-PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2010; 52(1):154-61. PMC: 3125596. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.110.079343. View

Catana C, Guimaraes A, Rosen B . PET and MR imaging: the odd couple or a match made in heaven?. J Nucl Med. 2013; 54(5):815-24. PMC: 3801211. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.112771. View

Camus V, Payoux P, Barre L, Desgranges B, Voisin T, Tauber C . Using PET with 18F-AV-45 (florbetapir) to quantify brain amyloid load in a clinical environment. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 39(4):621-31. PMC: 3315642. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-011-2021-8. View

Ashburner J, Friston K . Nonlinear spatial normalization using basis functions. Hum Brain Mapp. 1999; 7(4):254-66. PMC: 6873340. View

Coombs B, Szumowski J, Coshow W . Two-point Dixon technique for water-fat signal decomposition with B0 inhomogeneity correction. Magn Reson Med. 1997; 38(6):884-9. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.1910380606. View

Samarin A, Burger C, Wollenweber S, Crook D, Burger I, Schmid D . PET/MR imaging of bone lesions--implications for PET quantification from imperfect attenuation correction. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 39(7):1154-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-012-2113-0. View

Catana C, van der Kouwe A, Benner T, Michel C, Hamm M, Fenchel M . Toward implementing an MRI-based PET attenuation-correction method for neurologic studies on the MR-PET brain prototype. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51(9):1431-8. PMC: 3801218. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.069112. View

Kinahan P, Townsend D, Beyer T, SASHIN D . Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys. 1998; 25(10):2046-53. DOI: 10.1118/1.598392. View

10.

Berker Y, Franke J, Salomon A, Palmowski M, Donker H, Temur Y . MRI-based attenuation correction for hybrid PET/MRI systems: a 4-class tissue segmentation technique using a combined ultrashort-echo-time/Dixon MRI sequence. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53(5):796-804. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.092577. View

11.

Fass L . Imaging and cancer: a review. Mol Oncol. 2009; 2(2):115-52. PMC: 5527766. DOI: 10.1016/j.molonc.2008.04.001. View

12.

Andersen F, Ladefoged C, Beyer T, Keller S, Hansen A, Hojgaard L . Combined PET/MR imaging in neurology: MR-based attenuation correction implies a strong spatial bias when ignoring bone. Neuroimage. 2013; 84:206-16. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.042. View

13.

Schleyer P, Schaeffter T, Marsden P . The effect of inaccurate bone attenuation coefficient and segmentation on reconstructed PET images. Nucl Med Commun. 2010; 31(8):708-16. DOI: 10.1097/MNM.0b013e32833b0573. View

14.

Martinez-Moller A, Souvatzoglou M, Delso G, Bundschuh R, Chefdhotel C, Ziegler S . Tissue classification as a potential approach for attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI: evaluation with PET/CT data. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(4):520-6. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.054726. View

15.

Vunckx K, Atre A, Baete K, Reilhac A, Deroose C, Van Laere K . Evaluation of three MRI-based anatomical priors for quantitative PET brain imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2011; 31(3):599-612. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2011.2173766. View

16.

Minoshima S, Frey K, Koeppe R, Foster N, Kuhl D . A diagnostic approach in Alzheimer's disease using three-dimensional stereotactic surface projections of fluorine-18-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 1995; 36(7):1238-48. View

17.

Schulz V, Torres-Espallardo I, Renisch S, Hu Z, Ojha N, Bornert P . Automatic, three-segment, MR-based attenuation correction for whole-body PET/MR data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 38(1):138-52. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-010-1603-1. View

18.

Yankeelov T, Peterson T, Abramson R, Izquierdo-Garcia D, Garcia-Izquierdo D, Arlinghaus L . Simultaneous PET-MRI in oncology: a solution looking for a problem?. Magn Reson Imaging. 2012; 30(9):1342-56. PMC: 3466373. DOI: 10.1016/j.mri.2012.06.001. View

19.

Keereman V, Fierens Y, Broux T, De Deene Y, Lonneux M, Vandenberghe S . MRI-based attenuation correction for PET/MRI using ultrashort echo time sequences. J Nucl Med. 2010; 51(5):812-8. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.065425. View

20.

Chun S, Reese T, Ouyang J, Guerin B, Catana C, Zhu X . MRI-based nonrigid motion correction in simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53(8):1284-91. PMC: 4077320. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.092353. View