CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsLung Cancer Diagnosis and TreatmentRadiation Dose and Imaging

PET/CT in lung cancer: Influence of contrast medium on quantitative and clinical assessment

Behrendt, Florian F., Temur, Yavuz, Verburg, Frederik A., Palmowski, Moritz, Krohn, Thomas, Pietsch, Hubertus, Kuhl, Christiane K., Mottaghy, Felix M.·2012·European Radiology
DOI 10.1007/s00330-012-2515-1
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate the influence of intravenous contrast medium and different contrast medium phases on attenuation correction, PET image quality and clinical staging in combined PET/CT in patients with a suspicion of lung cancer. Methods Sixty patients with a suspicion of lung cancer were prospectively enrolled for combined (18)F-FDG-PET/CT examination. PET images were reconstructed with non-enhanced and arterial and venous phase contrast CT. Maximum and mean standardised uptake values (SUVmax and SUVmean) and contrast enhancement (HU) were determined in the subclavian vein, ascending aorta, abdominal aorta, inferior vena cava, portal vein, liver and kidney and lung tumour. PET data were evaluated visually for clinical staging and image quality. Results SUVmax was significantly increased between contrast and non-contrast PET/CT at all anatomic sites (all P Conclusions Contrast enhanced CT is suitable for attenuation correction in combined PET/CT in lung cancer; it affects neither the clinical assessment nor image quality of the PET images. Key points • Positron emission tomography combined with computed tomography is now a mainstream investigation • There has been debate about whether CT contrast agents affect PET results • Contrast-enhanced CT is satisfactory for attenuation correction in lung cancer PET/CT • Multiphase CT does not affect PET; additional unenhanced CT is unnecessary • For quantitative follow-up PET analysis, an identical PET/CT protocol is required.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00330-012-2515-1

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In tumor lesions, contrast-induced SUV increases are usually <10% and have been deemed irrelevant for visual assessment in previous studies.

    “In tumor lesions, such increases are usually <10% [115,116,117] and have been deemed irrelevant for visual assessment in previous studies [118,119].”

    From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [116]

  • In organs with a particularly high concentration of contrast agent (e.g., liver, kidney, or blood vessels), contrast-induced SUV deviations can be higher.

    “However, in organs with a particularly high concentration of the contrast agent (e.g., the liver, kidney, or blood vessels), these deviations can be higher [116,120,121].”

    From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [116]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Behrendt, F. F., Temur, Y., Verburg, F. A., Palmowski, M., Krohn, T., Pietsch, H., Kuhl, C. K., & Mottaghy, F. M.
Affiliations
  • Universitätsklinikum Aachen (DE)
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
  • Bayer (Germany) (DE)
Corresponding author
Behrendt, Florian F.
ORCID
Venue
European Radiology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2012-06-04
Volume
22
Issue
11
Pages
2458-2464
ISSN
  • 0938-7994 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1084
DOI
10.1007/s00330-012-2515-1
OpenAlex
W1984139388
Cited by
12
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4
FWCI
1.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • European Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Bayer
  • Bayer HealthCare
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Radiation Dose and Imaging
Keywords
lung cancer, PET/CT, 18F-FDG, intravenous contrast media, attenuation correction, standardized uptake value, multiphase CT, clinical staging, image quality, contrast enhancement
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Contrast Media, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Positron-Emission Tomography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review