A proper protocol for routine 18F-FDG uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT scans

Abstract

Abstract Background Conventional clinical PET scanners typically have an axial field of view (AFOV) of 15–30 cm, resulting in limited coverage and relatively low photon detection efficiency. Taking advantage of the development of long-axial PET/CT, the uEXPLORER PET/CT scanner with an axial coverage of 194 cm increases the effective count rate by approximately 40 times compared to that of conventional PET scanners. Ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) is the most widely used iterative algorithm in PET. The major drawback of OSEM is that the iteration process must be stopped before convergence to avoid image degradation due to excessive noise. A new Bayesian penalized-likelihood iterative PET reconstruction, named HYPER iterative, was developed and is now available on the uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT, which incorporates a noise control component by using a penalty function in each iteration and finds the maximum likelihood solution through repeated iterations. To date, its impact on lesion visibility in patients with a full injected dose or half injected dose is unclear. The goal of this study was to determine a proper protocol for routine 18F-FDG uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT scans. Results The uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT images reconstructed using both OSEM and HYPER iterative algorithms of 20 tumour patients were retrospectively reviewed. The quality of the 5 min PET image was excellent (score 5) for all of the dose and reconstruction methods. Using the HYPER iterative method, the PET images reached excellent quality at 1 min with full-dose PET and at 2 min with half-dose PET. The PET image reached a similar excellent quality at 2 min with a full dose and at 3 min with a half dose using OSEM. The noise in the OSEM reconstruction was higher than that in the HYPER iterative. Compared to OSEM, the HYPER iterative had a slightly higher SUVmax and TBR of the lesions for large positive lesions (≥ 2 cm) (SUVmax: up to 9.03% higher in full dose and up to 12.52% higher in half dose; TBR: up to 8.69% higher in full dose and up to 23.39% higher in half dose). For small positive lesions (≤ 10 mm), the HYPER iterative had an obviously higher SUVmax and TBR of the lesions (SUVmax: up to 45.21% higher in full dose and up to 74.96% higher in half dose; TBR: up to 44.91% higher in full dose and up to 93.73% higher in half dose). Conclusions A 1 min scan with a full dose and a 2 min scan with a half dose are optimal for clinical diagnosis using the HYPER iterative and 2 min and 3 min for OSEM. For quantification of the small lesions, HYPER iterative reconstruction is preferred.