Abstract
Objective
Quantitative values derived from PET brain images are of high interest for neuroscientific applications. Insufficient DT correction (DTC) can lead to a systematic bias of the output parameters obtained by a detailed analysis of the time activity curves (TACs). The DTC method currently used for the Siemens 3T MR BrainPET insert is global, i.e., differences in DT losses between detector blocks are not considered, leading to inaccurate DTC and, consequently, to inaccurate measurements masked by a bias. However, following careful evaluation with phantom measurements, a new block-pairwise DTC method has demonstrated a higher degree of accuracy compared to the global DTC method.
Approach
Differences between the global and the block-pairwise DTC method were studied in this work by applying several radioactive tracers. We evaluated the impact on [11C]ABP688, O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET), and [15O]H2O TACs.
Results
For [11C]ABP688, a relevant bias of between -0.0034 and -0.0053 ml/ (cm3 • min) was found in all studied brain regions for the volume of distribution (VT) when using the current global DTC method. For [18F]FET-PET, differences of up to 10% were observed in the tumor-to-brain ratio (TBRmax), these differences depend on the radial distance of the maximum from the PET isocenter. For [15O]H2O, differences between +4% and -7% were observed in the GM region. Average biases of -4.58%, -3.2%, and -1.2% for the regional cerebral blood flow (CBF (K1)), the rate constant k2, and the volume of distribution VT were observed, respectively. Conversely, in the white matter region, average biases of -4.9%, -7.0%, and 3.8% were observed for CBF (K1), k2, and VT, respectively.
Conclusion
The bias introduced by the global DTC method leads to an overestimation in the studied quantitative parameters for all applications compared to the block-pairwise method.
Significance
The observed differences between the two DTC methods are particularly relevant for research applications in neuroscientific studies as they affect the accuracy of quantitative Brain PET images.
Funder
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Reference61 articles.
1. The history of cerebral PET scanning: from physiology to cutting-edge technology;Leah H. Portnow;Neurology,2013
2. Spatially dependent deadtime losses in high count rate cardiac PET;NM Freedman;Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine,1992
3. NiftyPET: a high-throughput software platform for high quantitative accuracy and precision PET imaging and analysis;P.J. Markiewicz;Neuroinformatics,2018
4. Positron Emission Tomography