Comparison of Image Quality and Quantification Parameters between Q.Clear and OSEM Reconstruction Methods on FDG-PET/CT Images in Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer

Author:

Naghavi-Behzad Mohammad123ORCID,Vogsen Marianne1234ORCID,Gerke Oke12ORCID,Dahlsgaard-Wallenius Sara Elisabeth12,Nissen Henriette Juel12,Jakobsen Nick Møldrup12,Braad Poul-Erik15ORCID,Vilstrup Mie Holm12ORCID,Deak Paul6ORCID,Hildebrandt Malene Grubbe1237ORCID,Andersen Thomas Lund18

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, 5000 Odense, Denmark

2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark

3. Centre for Personalized Response Monitoring in Oncology, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark

4. Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark

5. Department at Clinical Engineering, Region of Southern Denmark, 6200 Aabenraa, Denmark

6. Healthcare Science Technology, GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL 06828, USA

7. Centre for Innovative Medical Technology, Odense University Hospital, 5000 Odense, Denmark

8. Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Rigshospitalet, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

Abstract

We compared the image quality and quantification parameters through bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm (Q.Clear) and ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm for 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT scans performed for response monitoring in patients with metastatic breast cancer in prospective setting. We included 37 metastatic breast cancer patients diagnosed and monitored with 2-[18F]FDG-PET/CT at Odense University Hospital (Denmark). A total of 100 scans were analyzed blinded toward Q.Clear and OSEM reconstruction algorithms regarding image quality parameters (noise, sharpness, contrast, diagnostic confidence, artefacts, and blotchy appearance) using a five-point scale. The hottest lesion was selected in scans with measurable disease, considering the same volume of interest in both reconstruction methods. SULpeak (g/mL) and SUVmax (g/mL) were compared for the same hottest lesion. There was no significant difference regarding noise, diagnostic confidence, and artefacts within reconstruction methods; Q.Clear had significantly better sharpness (p < 0.001) and contrast (p = 0.001) than the OSEM reconstruction, while the OSEM reconstruction had significantly less blotchy appearance compared with Q.Clear reconstruction (p < 0.001). Quantitative analysis on 75/100 scans indicated that Q.Clear reconstruction had significantly higher SULpeak (5.33 ± 2.8 vs. 4.85 ± 2.5, p < 0.001) and SUVmax (8.27 ± 4.8 vs. 6.90 ± 3.8, p < 0.001) compared with OSEM reconstruction. In conclusion, Q.Clear reconstruction revealed better sharpness, better contrast, higher SUVmax, and higher SULpeak, while OSEM reconstruction had less blotchy appearance.

Funder

GE Healthcare Company, Chicago, IL, USA

University of Southern Denmark

Odense University Hospital, Denmark

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Electrical and Electronic Engineering,Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design,Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3