CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 96Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Standardized uptake values for [18F] FDG in normal organ tissues: Comparison of whole-body PET/CT and PET/MRI

Heusch, Philipp, Buchbender, Christian, Beiderwellen, Karsten, Nensa, Felix, Hartung-Knemeyer, Verena, Lauenstein, Thomas C., Bockisch, Andreas, Forsting, Michael, Antoch, Gerald, Heusner, Till A.·2013·European Journal of Radiology
DOI 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.01.008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose To compare maximum and mean standardized uptake values (SUVmax/mean) of normal organ tissues derived from [(18)F]-fluoro-desoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MRI) using MR attenuation correction (MRAC) (DIXON-based 4-segment μ-map) with [(18)F]-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) using CT-based attenuation correction (CTAC). Methods and materials In 25 oncologic patients (15 men, 10 women; age 57 ± 13 years) after routine whole-body FDG-PET/CT (60 min after injection of 290 ± 40 MBq [(18)F]-FDG) a whole-body PET/MRI was performed (Magnetom Biograph mMR, Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany). Volumes of interest of 1.0 cm(3) were drawn in 7 physiological organ sites in MRAC-PET and the corresponding CTAC-PET images manually. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated to compare MRAC- and CTAC based SUV values; Wilcoxon-Matched-Pairs signed ranks test was performed to test for potential differences. Results The mean delay between FDG-PET/CT and PET/MRI was 92 ± 18 min. Excellent correlations of SUV values were found for the heart muscle (SUVmax/mean: R=0.97/0.97); reasonably good correlations were found for the liver (R=0.65/0.72), bone marrow (R=0.42/0.41) and the SUVmax of the psoas muscle (R=0.41). For subcutaneous fat, the correlation coefficient was 0.66 for SUVmean (p Conclusion In conclusion, in oncologic patients examined with PET/CT and PET/MRI SUVmax and SUVmean values generally corr…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.01.008

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

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?

  • Systematically different normal organ SUVs have been reported for [18F]FDG, most likely resulting from MR-AC inaccuracies.

    “However, systematically different normal organ SUVs have been reported for [18F]FDG as well, which most likely result from MR-AC inaccuracies [60,65,66].”

    From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [65]

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 29 · Cited by 96

Research works printed but not linked: 28

  1. Antoch, 2009, Combined PET/MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging?, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 36, S113, 10.1007/s00259-008-0951-6 · DOI
  2. Buchbender, 2012, Oncologic PET/MRI, part 2: bone tumors, soft-tissue tumors, melanoma, and lymphoma, Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 53, 1244, 10.2967/jnumed.112.109306 · DOI
  3. Herzog, 2012, Combined PET/MR systems: an overview and comparison of currently available options, The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 56, 247
  4. Buchbender, 2012, Oncologic PET/MRI, part 1: tumors of the brain, head and neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 53, 928, 10.2967/jnumed.112.105338 · DOI
  5. Drzezga, 2012, First clinical experience with integrated whole-body PET/MR: comparison to PET/CT in patients with oncologic diagnoses, Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 53, 845, 10.2967/jnumed.111.098608 · DOI
  6. Schwenzer, 2012, Pulmonary lesion assessment: comparison of whole-body hybrid MR/PET and PET/CT imaging—pilot study, Radiology, 10.1148/radiol.12111942 · DOI
  7. Wiesmuller, 2012, Comparison of lesion detection and quantitation of tracer uptake between PET from a simultaneously acquiring whole-body PET/MR hybrid scanner and PET from PET/CT, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
  8. Pichler, 2010, PET/MRI: paving the way for the next generation of clinical multimodality imaging applications, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 51, 333, 10.2967/jnumed.109.061853 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Pichler, 2006, Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 47, 639
  10. Delso, 2011, Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner, Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 52, 1914, 10.2967/jnumed.111.092726 · DOI
  11. Visvikis, 2003, CT-based attenuation correction in the calculation of semi-quantitative indices of [18F]FDG uptake in PET, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 30, 344, 10.1007/s00259-002-1070-4 · DOI
  12. Hofmann, 2009, Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 36, S93, 10.1007/s00259-008-1007-7 · DOI
  13. Dixon, 1984, Simple proton spectroscopic imaging, Radiology, 153, 189, 10.1148/radiology.153.1.6089263 · DOI
  14. Wahl, 2009, From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 50
  15. Eiber, 2011, Value of a Dixon-based MR/PET attenuation correction sequence for the localization and evaluation of PET-positive lesions, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 38, 1691, 10.1007/s00259-011-1842-9 · DOI
  16. Nahmias, 2008, Reproducibility of standardized uptake value measurements determined by 18F-FDG PET in malignant tumors, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 49, 1804, 10.2967/jnumed.108.054239 · DOI
  17. Westerterp, 2007, Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 34, 392, 10.1007/s00259-006-0224-1 · DOI
  18. Scheuermann, 2009, Qualification of PET scanners for use in multicenter cancer clinical trials: the American College of Radiology Imaging Network experience, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 50, 1187, 10.2967/jnumed.108.057455 · DOI
  19. Delso, 2011, Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 52, 1914, 10.2967/jnumed.111.092726 · DOI
  20. Jakoby, 2011, Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner, Physics in Medicine and Biology, 56, 2375, 10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/004 · DOI
  21. Boellaard, 2004, Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 45, 1519
  22. Boellaard, 2008, The Netherlands protocol for standardisation and quantification of FDG whole body PET studies in multi-centre trials, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 35, 2320, 10.1007/s00259-008-0874-2 · DOI
  23. Tellmann, 2011, The effect of MR surface coils on PET quantification in whole-body PET/MR: results from a pseudo-PET/MR phantom study, Medical Physics, 38, 2795, 10.1118/1.3582699 · DOI
  24. MacDonald, 2011, Effects of MR surface coils on PET quantification, Medical Physics, 38, 2948, 10.1118/1.3583697 · DOI
  25. Mantlik, 2011, The effect of patient positioning aids on PET quantification in PET/MR imaging, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 38, 920, 10.1007/s00259-010-1721-9 · DOI
  26. Paulus, 2012, Simultaneous PET/MR imaging: MR-based attenuation correction of local radiofrequency surface coils, Medical Physics, 39, 4306, 10.1118/1.4729716 · DOI
  27. Thie, 2004, Understanding the standardized uptake value, its methods, and implications for usage, Journal of Nuclear Medicine: Official Publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine, 45, 1431
  28. Lee, 2011, Detection of hepatic metastases using dual-time-point FDG PET/CT scans in patients with colorectal cancer, Molecular Imaging and Biology: MIB: The Official Publication of the Academy of Molecular Imaging, 13, 565, 10.1007/s11307-010-0394-x · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Heusch, P., Buchbender, C., Beiderwellen, K., Nensa, F., Hartung-Knemeyer, V., Lauenstein, T. C., Bockisch, A., Forsting, M., Antoch, G., & Heusner, T. A.
Affiliations
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
  • University of Duisburg-Essen (DE)
Corresponding author
Buchbender, Christian
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Radiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
82
Issue
5
Pages
870-876
ISSN
0720-048X (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.01.008
OpenAlex
W2031673966
Cited by
96
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 11
FWCI
13.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • European Journal of Radiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
standardized uptake value, FDG-PET, PET/MRI, PET/CT, CT attenuation correction, SUVmax, SUVmean, whole-body imaging, Dixon MRI, cancer patients, liver SUV, psoas muscle
MeSH terms
Female, Germany, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Metabolic Clearance Rate, Middle Aged, Organ Specificity, Reference Values, Sensitivity and Specificity, Tissue Distribution, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Radiopharmaceuticals, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography, Whole Body Imaging, Multimodal Imaging

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