• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.171-175
• /
• 2008

Purpose: There have been something difficulties in locating focuses and quantitative analysis in case of pediatric patients because of the relatively small body compared to adults. This author of this study, therefore, evaluated the usefulness of DFOV (Display Field Of View) according to its changes in PET/CT image reconstruction by means of the phantom experiment and pediatric patients examination. Materials & Methods: 0.023 MBq/cc of $^{18}F$-FDG was put into the uniform NU2-94 phantom, and then emission scan was acquired for 10 minutes. For reconstruction, DFOV values were changed to 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, and 25 cm respectively. As for patient images, 20 patients who were diagnosed as the one or suspicion of the children tumor are targeted from Oct 2007 to Jan 2008. For image reconstruction, 50 cm was the basis of DFOV, and the value was adjusted to DFOV 45 cm to 25 cm respectively. In the phantom and the reconstruction image of pediatric patients, the changes in pixel size and $SUV_{max}$ according to DFOV changes were analyzed. Results: As DFOV decreased to 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, and 25 cm by means of the phantom, the pixel size was changed to 3.906, 3.515, 3.125, 2.734, 2.343, and 1.953 mm respectively. Besides, as a result of reconstruction DFOV in images of pediatric patients to 50, to 25 cm, the different values of $SUV_{max}$ are shown as 3.3, 7.3, 12, 14, 18% and 2.6, 4.3, 5.0, 7.0, 10.0% on respectively when 50 cm was the standard. Conclusion: In $SUV_{max}$ using the phantom, as DFOV decreased every 5 cm, the mean value gradually increased. With 50 cm as the standard, the increase rates were 3.7, 6.5, 11.2, 19.5, and 32.1% respectively. As for pediatric patients image too, as DFOV decreased, the rates increased as in the phantom experiment. In image reconstruction, since DFOV decrease regardless of matrix size change reduced the pixel size, the image quality can be improved. This would be more useful than reconstruction and enlarge images of pediatric patients in the same way of examining adults. However, when the value of 35 cm DFOV was applied, this may result in truncated artifact, and thus the application should be properly controlled. Change of DFOV may produce better image for pediatric patients, but changes of SUV values according to DFOV change should be considered in reading.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.13-20
• /
• 2011

Purpose: The limited FOV(Field of View) of CT (Computed Tomography) can cause truncation artifact at external DFOV (Display Field of View) in PET/CT image. In our study, we measured the difference of SUV and compared the influence affecting to the image reconstructed with the extended DFOV. Materials and Methods: NEMA 1994 PET Phantom was filled with $^{18}F$(FDG) of 5.3 kBq/mL and placed at the center of FOV. Phantom images were acquired through emission scan. Shift the phantom's location to the external edge of DFOV and images were acquired with same method. All of acquired data through each experiment were reconstructed with same method, DFOV was applied 50 cm and 70 cm respectively. Then ROI was set up on the emission image, performed the comparative analysis SUV. In the clinical test, patient group shown truncation artifact was selected. ROI was set up at the liver of patient's image and performed the comparative analysis SUV according to the change of DFOV. Results: The pixel size was increase from 3.91 mm to 5.47 mm according to the DFOV increment in the centered location phantom study. When extended DFOV was applied, $_{max}SUV$ of ROI was decreased from 1.49 to 1.35. In case of shifted the center of phantom location study, $_{max}SUV$ was decreased from 1.30 to 1.20. The $_{max}SUV$ was 1.51 at the truncated region in the extended DFOV. The difference of the $_{max}SUV$ was 25.9% higher at the outside of the truncated region than inside. When the extended DFOV was applied, $_{max}SUV$ was decreased from 3.38 to 3.13. Conclusion: When the extended DFOV was applied, $_{max}SUV$ decreasing phenomenon can cause pixel to pixel noise by increasing of pixel size. In this reason, $_{max}SUV$ was underestimated. Therefore, We should consider the underestimation of quantitative result in the whole image plane in case of patient study applied extended DFOV protocol. Consequently, the result of the quantitative analysis may show more higher than inside at the truncated region.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.90-94
• /
• 2013

Purpose: In the PET/CT images, various artifacts cause degradation of the quantitative assessment. Most hotspot generated by radiopharmaceutical injection errors cause an artifact and degrade the quality of the images as well as the accuracy of the quantitative evaluation. The purpose of this study is to assess effectiveness of the elimination of the hotspot at the injection sites using shifting the center of DFOV (Display Field of View, DFOV) method and evaluate the quantitative evaluation of result. Materials and Methods: GE Discovery STE 16 (GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, USA) and 1994 NEMA phantom were used for imaging acquisition. Phantom was filled with 0.005 MBq/mL of $^{18}F-FDG$. A hotspot was artificially placed on the outside of the phantom. The ratio of hotspot area activity to background area activity was regulated as 200:1. After image acquisition with routine protocol, all of the images were reconstructed using the shifting the center of DFOV method that wasn't overlapped with hotspot. Those images obtained before and after applying the shifting reconstruction method were compared. ROIs (Region Of Interests) were set in the hotspot areas, meanSUVs and standard deviations were calculated. Percentage differences were calculated with those meanSUVs and standard deviations. The evaluation on the effects of the shifting reconstruction method was done by comparison of the meanSUVs and the standard deviations, which were calculated for background areas unaffected by hotspot. Results: In the areas of unaffected by hotspot, meanSUVs before and after applying the shifting of center of DFOV method were $0.67{\pm}0.06g/mL$ and $0.65{\pm}0.06g/mL$, respectively. In the artifact areas affected by hotspot, meanSUVs before and after applying the shifting of center of DFOV method were $0.32{\pm}0.08g/mL$ and $0.56{\pm}0.12g/mL$, respectively. The percentage differences of the area adjacent to the hotspot and the area distant from the hotspot were 65.3% and 97.4%, respectively. Conclusion: In the PET/CT images, meanSUV was improved by 32.1% when the effect of artifact was removed with application of the shifting the center of DFOV methode. In other areas unaffected by artifacts, meanSUVs were not significantly different after applying DFOV center shift method. As shown in the result, adverse effects of hotspot made by swelling in the injection site can be reduced by applying DFOV center shift method. Therefore, DFOV center shift method can be applied for the more precise quantitative evaluation, and contribute to the increase of the diagnostic value of the images.

• Journal of the Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers
• /
• v.51 no.12
• /
• pp.163-173
• /
• 2014

When evaluating the spatial resolution images and evaluation of low contrast resolution using CT standard phantom, and might present a automated quantitative evaluation method for minimizing errors by subjective judgment of the evaluator be, and try to evaluate the usefulness. 120kVp and 250mAs, 10mm collimation, SFOV(scan field of view) of 25cm or more than, exposure conditions DFOV(display field of view) of 25cm, and were evaluated the 24 passing images and 20 failing images taken using a standard reconstruction algorithm by using the Nuclear Associates, Inc. AAPM CT Performance Phantom(Model 76-410). Quantitative evaluation of low contrast resolution and spatial resolution was using an evaluation program that was self-developed using the company Mathwork Matlab(Ver. 7.6. (R2008a)) software. In this study, the results were evaluated using the evaluation program that was self-developed in the evaluation of images using CT standard phantom, it was possible to evaluate an objective numerical qualitative evaluation item. First, if the contrast resolution, if EI is 0.50, 0.51, 0.52, 0.53, as a result of evaluating quantitatively the results were evaluated qualitatively match. Second, if CNR is -0.0018~-0.0010, as a result of evaluating quantitatively the results were evaluated qualitatively match. Third, if the spatial resolution, as a result of using a image segmentation technique, and automatically extract the contour boundary of the hole, as a result of evaluating quantitatively the results were evaluated qualitatively match.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.255-261
• /
• 2016

In this study, among various factors having influence on SUV, we intended to compare and analyze the change of SUV using CT(4 type) and MRI(3 type) contrast agents which are commercialized now. We used Discovery 690 PET/CT(GE) and NEMA NU2 - 1994 PET phantom as experimental equipment. We have conducted a study as follows; first, we filled distilled water to phantom about two-thirds and injected radioisotope(18F-FDG 37 MBq), contrast agent. Second, we mixed CT contrast agent with distilled water and MRI contrast agent with that water separately. And then, we stirred the fluid and filled distilled water fully not to make air bubble. In emission scan, we had 15minutes scanning time after 40 minutes mixing contrast agent with distilled water. In transmission scan, we used CT scanning and its measurement conditions were tube voltage 120 kVp, tube current 40 mA, rotation time 0.5 sec, slice thickness 3.27 mm, DFOV 30 cm. Analyzing results, we set up some ROIs in 10th, 15th, 20th, 25th, 30th slice and measured SUVmean, SUVmax. Consequently, all images mixed 3 types of MRI contrast agent with distilled water have high SUVmean as compared with pure FDG image but there was no statistical significance. In SUVmax, they have high score and there was statistical significance. And other 4 images mixed 4 types of CT contrast agent with distilled water have significance in both SUVmean and SUVmax. Attenuation correction in PET/CT has been executed through various methods to make high quality image. But we figured out that using CT and MRI contrast agents before PET/CT scanning could make distortion of image and decrease diagnostic value. In that reason, we have to sort out the priority of examination in hospital not to disturb other examination's results. Through this process, we will be able to give superior medical service to our customers.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.63-67
• /
• 2015

Purpose Among various causes that influence image quality degradation, various methods for decrease in Artifact occurred by respiration of patients are being used. Among them, this study intended to evaluate CTAC Shift correction method and additional scan compare to the Scan(Q static scan) using respiratory gated system. Materials and Methods This study was conducted on 10 patients, and used PET-CT Discovery 710 (GE Healthcare, MI, USA) and Varian's RPM system. 5.18 Mbq per kg of $^{18}F$-FDG was injected on patients, asked them to take a rest for 1 hour in the bed, and conducted test after urination. Images were visualized through Q static scan, CTAC Shift correction method, Additional scan based on the Whole body scan(WBS) with Artifact. Decrease in Artifact was compared in each image, conducted Gross Evalution, and measured changes of SUVmax. Results For image obtained through the CTAC Shift correction method through WBS with Artifact, 12~56%, Q static scan image showed 17~54% of change rate and Additional Scan showed -27~46% of change rate. In Blind Test, the CTAC Shift correction image showed the highest point with 4 points, Q static scan image showed 3.5 points, and Additional scan image showed 3.4 points. The standardized WBS scan through Oneway ANOVA and three types of Scan method showed significant difference(p<0.05), and did not show significant difference between the three Scan methods(p>0.05). However, the three Scan methods showed significant difference in Blind test. Conclusion Additional scan and Q static scan require more time than the CTAC Shift correction method, there is concern about excessive exposure to patients by CT rescan and Q static scan is difficult to apply on patients with inconsistent respiration or irregular respiration cycle due to pain. For CTAC Shift correction method, limited correction is possible and the range is limited as well. It is considered as a useful method of improving diagnostic value when hospitals use the system appropriately and develop various advantageous factors of each method.