Effect of time-of-flight technique on the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT for assessment of lymph node metastases in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma
Open accessAbstract
UNLABELLED: Precise assessment of lymph node metastases is critical to the treatment outcome and overall survival of patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of time-of-flight (TOF) technique on the diagnostic performance of (18)F-FDG PET/CT for assessment of lymph node metastases in HNSCC patients. METHODS: In 39 patients with an initial diagnosis of HNSCC, preoperative staging (18)F-FDG PET/CT was performed to assess lymph node metastases before surgery and histologic verification. Potential lymph node metastases were evaluated and documented separately for the right and left neck in accordance with the head and neck lymph node level classification. Two experienced readers measured lesion volume and uptake for every PET-positive lymph node. Sensitivity, specificity, image quality, and the PET characterization of the lesion (benign or malignant) were compared between different reconstruction methods (TOF PET and standard high-definition PET) and matrices for both readers. RESULTS: TOF PET significantly increased the maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax) but had no significant effect on lesion volume. However, a higher SUVmax did not result in a significant increase in small-lesion detection. Sensitivity and image quality were slightly improved with TOF PET but not significantly so. Matrix, on the other hand, had a significant effect on detected lesion numbers, sensitivity, and image quality. CONCLUSION: For preoperative assessment of lymph node metastases in HNSCC, (18)F-FDG PET/CT using TOF technique increases SUVmax in lesions and improves image quality but has no significant impact on small-lesion detectability.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Time of flight (TOF) increases lesion contrast recovery (CR) and SUV compared to non-TOF PET at a comparable level of image noise.
“Briefly, TOF increases the lesion’s CR and SUV compared to non-TOF PET at a comparable level of image noise [94,95,96].”
From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [96]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0
Boellaard, R., O’Doherty, M. J., Weber, W., Mottaghy, F. M., Lonsdale, M. N., Stroobants, S. G., Oyen, W. J. G., Kotzerke, J., Hoekstra, O. S., Pruim, J., et al. (2009) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4 · Cited by 1,329 · see citing works
Recommendations on the Use of 18 F-FDG PET in Oncology
Fletcher, J. W., Djulbegović, B., Soares, H. P., Siegel, B. A., Lowe, V. J., Lyman, G. H., Coleman, R. E., Wahl, R. L., Paschold, J. C., Avril, N. E., et al. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787 · Cited by 1,097 · see citing works
Neck Dissection Classification Update
Robbins, K. T., Clayman, G., Levine, P. A., Medina, J. E., Sessions, R. B., Shaha, A. R., Som, P. M., & Wolf, G. T. (2002) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.128.7.751 · Cited by 1,009 · see citing works
Benefit of Time-of-Flight in PET: Experimental and Clinical Results
Karp, J. S., Surti, S., Daube-Witherspoon, M. E., & Muehllehner, G. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.044834 · Cited by 585 · see citing works
Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner
Jakoby, B., Bercier, Y., Conti, M., Casey, M. E., Bendriem, B., & Townsend, D. W. (2011) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/004 · Cited by 487 · see citing works
Physical Performance of the new hybrid PET/CT Discovery-690
Bettinardi, V., Presotto, L., Rapisarda, E., Picchio, M., Gianolli, L., & Gilardi, M. C. (2011) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.3635220 · Cited by 377 · see citing works
Lymph node prognostic factors in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas
Mamelle, G., Pampurik, J., Luboinski, B., et al. (1994) · The American Journal of Surgery · doi:10.1016/s0002-9610(05)80109-6 · Cited by 364 · see citing works
Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Value of Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Nodal Staging
Vandecaveye, V., Keyzer, F. D., Poorten, V. V., et al. (2009) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2511080128 · Cited by 342 · see citing works
Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution
Conti, M. (2011) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-010-1711-y · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Time-of-flight positron emission tomography: status relative to conventional PET.
Budinger, T. F. (1983) · PubMed · Cited by 278 · see citing works
Impact of Time-of-Flight on PET Tumor Detection
Kadrmas, D. J., Casey, M. E., Conti, M., Jakoby, B. W., Lois, C., & Townsend, D. W. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.063016 · Cited by 277 · see citing works
An Assessment of the Impact of Incorporating Time-of-Flight Information into Clinical PET/CT Imaging
Lois, C., Jakoby, B., Long, M. J., Hübner, K. F., Barker, D. W., Casey, M., Conti, M., Panin, V., Kadrmas, D. J., & Townsend, D. W. (2010) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.068098 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Yoon, D. Y., Hwang, H. S., Chang, S. K., Rho, Y. S., Ahn, H. Y., Kim, J. H., & Lee, I. J. (2008) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-008-1192-6 · Cited by 198 · see citing works
Positron emission imaging of head and neck cancer, including thyroid carcinoma
Schöder, H. M., & YEUNG, H. W. D. (2004) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2004.03.004 · Cited by 176 · see citing works
First experimental results of time-of-flight reconstruction on an LSO PET scanner
Conti, M., Bendriem, B., Casey, M., Chen, M., Kehren, F., Michel, C. J., & Panin, V. (2005) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/19/006 · Cited by 164 · see citing works
Need for Standardization of 18F-FDG PET/CT for Treatment Response Assessments
Boellaard, R. (2011) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.110.085662 · Cited by 159 · see citing works
Rodrigues, R. S., Bozza, F. A., Christian, P. E., et al. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.109.062075 · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Akamatsu, G., Mitsumoto, K., Taniguchi, T., Tsutsui, Y., Baba, S., & Sasaki, M. (2014) · European Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.09.030 · Cited by 96 · see citing works
Comparison of Fast Scintillators With TOF PET Potential
Conti, M., Eriksson, L., Rothfuß, H., et al. (2009) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/tns.2008.2009446 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Menda, Y., & Graham, M. M. (2005) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2005.05.001 · Cited by 95 · see citing works
Experimental evaluation of a simple lesion detection task with time-of-flight PET
Surti, S., & Karp, J. S. (2008) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/2/013 · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Recommendations on the Use of 18F-FDG PET in Oncology
Elster, A. D. (2009) · Yearbook of Diagnostic Radiology · doi:10.1016/s0098-1672(08)79209-9 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Feasibility of time-of-flight reconstruction in positron emission tomography.
Mullani, N. A., Markham, J., & Ter‐Pogossian, M. M. (1980) · PubMed · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Murray, I., Kalemis, A., Glennon, J., Hasan, S., Quraishi, S., Beyer, T., & Avril, N. E. (2010) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-010-1466-5 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Riffel, P., Michaely, H. J., Morelli, J. N., Pfeuffer, J., Attenberger, U. I., Schoenberg, S. O., & Haneder, S. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0089468 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
Self-citationKapoor, V., Fukui, M. B., & McCook, B. (2005) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.184.2.01840579 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Aktuelle Standards und Fortschritte in der onkologischen Bildgebung von Kopf-Hals-Tumoren
Sadick, M., Schoenberg, S., Hoermann, K., & Sadick, H. (2012) · Laryngo-Rhino-Otologie · doi:10.1055/s-0031-1297259 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Self-citationFEASIBILITY OF TIME-OF-FLIGHT RECONSTRUCTION IN POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY
Mullani, N. A., Markham, J., Ter-Pogossian, M. M., et al. (1981) · Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography · doi:10.1097/00004728-198106000-00052 · Cited by 31 · see citing works
Hausmann, D., Bittencourt, L. K., Attenberger, U. I., Sertdemir, M., Weidner, A., Büsing, K. A., Brade, J., Wenz, F. K., Schoenberg, S. O., & Dinter, D. J. (2013) · Clinical Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1097/rlu.0b013e3182a23d37 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Self-citationSadick, M., Molina, F. D., Frey, S., et al. (2013) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology · doi:10.2967/jnmt.112.116806 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationExperimental evaluation of a simple lesion detection task with Time-of-Flight PET
Surti, S., & Karp, J. S. (2009) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/54/4/c01 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
First experimental results of time-of-flight reconstruction on an LSO PET scanner
Conti, M., Bendriem, B., Casey, M., et al. (2006) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/52/8/c01 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [18]18. Bettinardi V, Presotto L, Rapisarda E, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC. Phys- ical performance of the new hybrid PETCT Discovery-690. Med Phys. 2011;38:5394-5411.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation
Rogasch, J. M. M., Hofheinz, F., van Heek, L., Voltin, C.-A., Boellaard, R., & Kobe, C. (2022) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics12020451 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
- Authors
- Li, C.-Y., Klohr, S., Sadick, H., Weiss, C., Hoermann, K., Schoenberg, S. O., & Sadick, M.
- Affiliations
- Heidelberg University (DE)
- Venue
- Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
- Publisher
- Society of Nuclear Medicine
- Published
- 2014-06-26
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 181-187
- ISSN
- 0091-4916 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2028250370
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Otorhinolaryngology › Head and Neck Cancer Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
- Keywords
- time-of-flight PET, 18F-FDG PET/CT, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, lymph node metastasis, preoperative staging, SUVmax, image quality, small lesion detection, diagnostic accuracy
- MeSH terms
- Squamous Cell Carcinoma of Head and Neck, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Carcinoma, Squamous Cell, Female, Head and Neck Neoplasms, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Lymph Nodes, Lymphatic Metastasis, Male, Middle Aged, Sensitivity and Specificity, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Radiopharmaceuticals, Fluorodeoxyglucose F18, Positron-Emission Tomography, 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
