TY - JOUR
T1 - Accuracy of amplitude-based respiratory gating for PET/CT in irregular respirations
AU - Tsutsui, Yuji
AU - Kidera, Daisuke
AU - Taniguchi, Takafumi
AU - Akamatsu, Go
AU - Komiya, Isao
AU - Umezu, Yoshiyuki
AU - Kitamura, Yoshiyuki
AU - Baba, Shingo
AU - Sasaki, Masayuki
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2014, The Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine.
PY - 2014/10/16
Y1 - 2014/10/16
N2 - Objective: We evaluated the accuracy of amplitude gating PET (AG-PET) compared with phase gating PET (PG-PET) in relation to respiratory motion patterns based on a phantom analysis.Method: We used a NEMA IEC body phantom filled with an 18F solution with a 4:1 sphere-to-background radioactivity ratio (12.6 and 2.97 kBq/mL). PET/CT scans were acquired in a motionless and moving state on a Biograph mCT. The respiratory movements were simulated by four different waveform patterns consisting of ideal breathing, breathing with a pause period, breathing with a variable amplitude and breathing with a changing baseline. AG-PET selects the narrow bandwidth containing 20 % of the respiratory cycle. PG-PET was reconstructed with five gates. The image quality was physically assessed using the percent contrast (QH,10mm), background variability (N10mm) recovery coefficient (RC), and sphere volumes.Result: In regular motion patterns with ideal breathing and breathing with a pause period, the QH,10mm, RC and sphere volumes were not different between AG-PET and PG-PET. In the variable amplitude pattern, the QH,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (35.8 vs 28.2 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.4 vs 8.6 mL). In the changing baseline pattern, the QH,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (42.4 vs 16.7 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.2 vs 9.8 mL). The N10mm did not differ between AG-PET and PG-PET, irrespective of the motion pattern.Conclusion: Amplitude gating PET is considered to be more accurate than phase gating PET for examining unstable respiratory motion patterns, such as those involving a variable amplitude or changing baseline.
AB - Objective: We evaluated the accuracy of amplitude gating PET (AG-PET) compared with phase gating PET (PG-PET) in relation to respiratory motion patterns based on a phantom analysis.Method: We used a NEMA IEC body phantom filled with an 18F solution with a 4:1 sphere-to-background radioactivity ratio (12.6 and 2.97 kBq/mL). PET/CT scans were acquired in a motionless and moving state on a Biograph mCT. The respiratory movements were simulated by four different waveform patterns consisting of ideal breathing, breathing with a pause period, breathing with a variable amplitude and breathing with a changing baseline. AG-PET selects the narrow bandwidth containing 20 % of the respiratory cycle. PG-PET was reconstructed with five gates. The image quality was physically assessed using the percent contrast (QH,10mm), background variability (N10mm) recovery coefficient (RC), and sphere volumes.Result: In regular motion patterns with ideal breathing and breathing with a pause period, the QH,10mm, RC and sphere volumes were not different between AG-PET and PG-PET. In the variable amplitude pattern, the QH,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (35.8 vs 28.2 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.4 vs 8.6 mL). In the changing baseline pattern, the QH,10mm of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET (42.4 vs 16.7 %), the RC of AG-PET was higher than that of PG-PET and sphere volume of AG-PET was smaller than that of PG-PET (6.2 vs 9.8 mL). The N10mm did not differ between AG-PET and PG-PET, irrespective of the motion pattern.Conclusion: Amplitude gating PET is considered to be more accurate than phase gating PET for examining unstable respiratory motion patterns, such as those involving a variable amplitude or changing baseline.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919873943&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919873943&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s12149-014-0870-5
DO - 10.1007/s12149-014-0870-5
M3 - Article
C2 - 24950753
AN - SCOPUS:84919873943
SN - 0914-7187
VL - 28
SP - 770
EP - 779
JO - Annals of Nuclear Medicine
JF - Annals of Nuclear Medicine
IS - 8
ER -