» Articles » PMID: 25097133

Amplitude-based Optimal Respiratory Gating in Positron Emission Tomography in Patients with Primary Lung Cancer

Overview
Journal Eur Radiol
Specialty Radiology
Date 2014 Aug 7
PMID 25097133
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: Respiratory motion during PET imaging introduces quantitative and diagnostic inaccuracies, which may result in non-optimal patient management. This study investigated the effects of respiratory gating on image quantification using an amplitude-based optimal respiratory gating (ORG) algorithm.

Methods: Whole body FDG-PET/CT was performed in 66 lung cancer patients. The respiratory signal was obtained using a pressure sensor integrated in an elastic belt placed around the patient's thorax. ORG images were reconstructed with 50%, 35%, and 20% of acquired PET data (duty cycle). Lesions were grouped into anatomical locations. Differences in lesion volume between ORG and non-gated images, and mean FDG-uptake (SUVmean) were calculated.

Results: Lesions in the middle and lower lobes demonstrated a significant SUVmean increase for all duty cycles and volume decrease for duty cycles of 35% and 20%. Significant increase in SUVmean and decrease in volume for lesions in the upper lobes were observed for a 20% duty cycle. The SUVmean increase for central lesions was significant for all duty cycles, whereas a significant volume decrease was observed for a duty cycle of 20%.

Conclusions: This study implies that ORG could influence clinical PET imaging with respect to response monitoring and radiotherapy planning.

Key Points: Quantifying lesion volume and uptake in PET is important for patient management. Respiratory motion artefacts introduce inaccuracies in quantification of PET images. Amplitude-based optimal respiratory gating maintains image quality through selection of duty cycle. The effect of respiratory gating on lesion quantification depends on anatomical location.

Citing Articles

Data-driven gating (DDG)-based motion match for improved CTAC registration.

Cook E, Su K, Higgins G, Johnsen R, Bouhnik J, McGowan D EJNMMI Phys. 2024; 11(1):42.

PMID: 38691232 PMC: 11554991. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-024-00644-0.


Reproducibility of lung cancer radiomics features extracted from data-driven respiratory gating and free-breathing flow imaging in [F]-FDG PET/CT.

Faist D, Jreige M, Oreiller V, Nicod Lalonde M, Schaefer N, Depeursinge A Eur J Hybrid Imaging. 2022; 6(1):33.

PMID: 36309636 PMC: 9617997. DOI: 10.1186/s41824-022-00153-2.


Respiratory 4D-Gating F-18 FDG PET/CT Scan for Liver Malignancies: Feasibility in Liver Cancer Patient and Tumor Quantitative Analysis.

Cheung A, Wu V, Cheung A, Cai J Front Oncol. 2022; 12:789506.

PMID: 35223472 PMC: 8864173. DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.789506.


Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation.

Rogasch J, Hofheinz F, van Heek L, Voltin C, Boellaard R, Kobe C Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(2).

PMID: 35204542 PMC: 8871060. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12020451.


Evaluating two respiratory correction methods for abdominal PET/MRI imaging.

Ruan W, Liu F, Sun X, Hu F, Wu T, Zhang Y EJNMMI Phys. 2022; 9(1):5.

PMID: 35099646 PMC: 8804027. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-022-00430-w.


References
1.
de Geus-Oei L, van der Heijden H, Visser E, Hermsen R, van Hoorn B, Timmer-Bonte J . Chemotherapy response evaluation with 18F-FDG PET in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(10):1592-8. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.107.043414. View

2.
Mac Manus M, Hicks R, Matthews J, McKenzie A, Rischin D, Salminen E . Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography scanning for response-assessment after radical radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2003; 21(7):1285-92. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.054. View

3.
Chang G, Chang T, Pan T, Clark Jr J, Mawlawi O . Implementation of an automated respiratory amplitude gating technique for PET/CT: clinical evaluation. J Nucl Med. 2009; 51(1):16-24. PMC: 3963814. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.109.068759. View

4.
van Elmpt W, Hamill J, Jones J, De Ruysscher D, Lambin P, Ollers M . Optimal gating compared to 3D and 4D PET reconstruction for characterization of lung tumours. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011; 38(5):843-55. PMC: 3070073. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-010-1716-6. View

5.
Fletcher J, Djulbegovic B, Soares H, Siegel B, Lowe V, Lyman G . Recommendations on the use of 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2008; 49(3):480-508. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.107.047787. View