Download PDF
Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44(S 01): S51-S57
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1625216
Original Articles
Schattauer GmbH

PET/CT

Dose-escalated image fusion?PET/CTDosiseskalierte Bildfusion?
G. Brix
1   Federal Office for Radiation Protection, Division of Medical Radiation Hygiene and Dosimetry, Neuherberg
,
T. Beyer
2   Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Essen, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 01 June 2005

in revised form: 17 August 2005

Publication Date:
11 January 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary:

Clinical studies demonstrate a gain in diagnostic accuracy by employing combined PET/CT instead of separate CT and PET imaging. However, whole-body PET/CT examinations result in a comparatively high radiation burden to patients and thus require a proper justification and optimization to avoid repeated exposure or over-exposure of patients. This review article summarizes relevant data concerning radiation exposure of patients resulting from the different components of a combined PET/CT examination and presents different imaging strategies that can help to balance the diagnostic needs and the radiation protection requirements. In addition various dose reduction measures are discussed, some of which can be adopted from CT practice, while others mandate modifications to the existing hardand software of PET/CT systems.

Zusammenfassung:

Klinische Studien belegen, dass durch kombinierte PET/CTUntersuchungen die diagnostische Aussagekraft im Vergleich zu separat durchgeführten PET- und CT-Untersuchungen verbessert werden kann. Allerdings sind PET/ CT-Untersuchungen für den einzelnen Patienten mit einer vergleichsweise hohen Strahlenexposition verbunden, so dass sie einer sorgfältigen Rechtfertigung und Optimierung bedürfen, um Wiederholungsuntersuchungen bzw. unnötig hohe Strahlenexpositionen zu vermeiden. Diese Arbeit gibt einen Überblick über die mit den einzelnen Komponenten einer PET/CT-Untersuchung verbundene Patientenexposition und stellt verschiedene Untersuchungsstrategien mit dem Ziel vor, die diagnostisch erforderliche Bildqualität mit den Anforderungen des Strahlenschutzes in Einklang zu bringen. Darüber hinaus werden verschiedene Dosisreduktionstechniken besprochen, von denen einige direkt aus der konventionellen CT-Praxis übernommen werden können, während andere Modifikationen der derzeitigen Hard- und Software von PET/CT-Systemen erforderlich machen.

Key words:

PET/CT - image fusion - exposure - dosimetry

Schlüsselwörter:

PET/CT - Bildfusion - Exposition - Dosimetrie
 

  • References

  • 1 Antoch G, Feudenberg LS, Beyer T. et al. To enhance or not to enhance? 18F-FDG and CT contrast agents in dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/ CT. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (Suppl. 01) 56S-65S.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Benatar NA, Cronin BF, O’Doherty MJ. Radiation dose rates from patients undergoing PET: implications for technologist and waiting areas. Eur J Nucl Med 2000; 27: 583-9.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Beyer T, Antoch G, Müller S. et al. Acquisition protocol considerations for combined PET/ CT imaging. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (Suppl. 01) 25S-35S.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Beyer T, Antoch G, Bockisch A. et al. Optimized intravenous contrast administration for diagnostic whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 429-35.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Beyer T. Towards truly integrated hardware fusion with PET/CT. Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44 (Suppl. 01) S5-12.
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Bixler A, Springer G, Lovas R. Practical aspects of radiation safety for using fluorine-18. J Nucl Med Technol 1999; 27: 14-6.
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Bockisch A, Beyer T, Antoch G. et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography – imaging protocols, artifacts, and pitfalls. Mol Imaging Biol 2004; 6: 188-99.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Brix G, Noßke D, Glatting G. et al. A survey of PET activity in Germany during 1999. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 1091-7.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Brix G, Nagel HD, Stamm G. et al. Radiation exposure in multi-slice versus single-slice spiral CT: Results of a nationwide survey. Eur Radiol 2003; 13: 1979-91.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Brix G, Lechel U, Veit R. et al. Assessment of a theoretical formalism for dose estimation in CT: An anthropomorphic phantom study. Eur Radiol 2004; 14: 1275-84.
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G. et al. Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dualmodality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 608-13.
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Brix G, Nekolla E, Griebel J. Strahlenexposition von Patienten durch diagnostische und interventionelle Röntgenanwendungen: Fakten, Bewertung und Trends. Radiologe 2005; 45: 340-9.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz. Bekanntmachung der diagnostischen Referenzwerte für radiologische und nuklearmedizinische Untersuchungen. Bundesanzeiger Nr. 143 (5. August 2003): 17503.
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Czernin J, Auerbach M-A. Clinical PET/CT imaging: promises and misconceptions?. Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44 (Suppl. 01) S18-23.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Council of the European Union (1997) Council directive 97/43/Euratom of 30 June 1997 on health protection against the dangers of ionizing radiation in relation to medical exposure, and repealing directive 84/466/Euratom. Document 397L0043. Official Journal No. L 180, 09/07/1997: 0022 – 0027.
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Dahlbom M, Yu DC, Cherry SR. et al. Methods for improving image quality in whole body PET scanning. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1992; 39: 1079-83.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 17 European Commission. Report EUR 16262 EN – European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. 2nd ed. 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Greess H, Wolf H, Baum U. et al. Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based online modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions. Eur Radiol 2000; 10: 391-4.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Herrmann T. Radiation oncology and functional imaging. Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44 (Suppl. 01) S38-40.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 20 ICRP Publication 60. 1990 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Annals of the ICRP 1991; 21: 1-3.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 21 ICRP Publication 73. Radiological protection and safety in medicine. Annals of the ICRP 1996; 26/2.
    Google Scholar
  • 22 ICRP Publication 80. Radiation dose to patients from radiopharmaceuticals. Annals of the ICRP 1999; 28/3.
    Google Scholar
  • 23 ICRP Publication 87. Managing patient dose in computed tomography. Annals of the ICRP 2001; 30/4.
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Kachelriess M, Watzke O, Kalender WA. Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral single-slice, multi-slice and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2001; 28: 475-90.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C. et al. Dose reduction in CT by on-line tube current control: principles and validation on phantoms and cadavers. Eur Radiol 1999; 9: 323-8.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL. et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004; 230: 619-28.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kamel E, Hany TF, Burger C. et al. CT vs 68Ge attenuation correction in a combined PET/CT system: evaluation of the effect of lowering the CT tube current. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2002; 29: 346-50.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Beyer T. et al. Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys 1998; 25: 2046-53.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kinahan PE, Hasegawa BH, Beyer T. X-ray-based attenuation correction for positron emission tomography/ computed tomography scanners. Semin Nucl Med 2003; 33: 166-79.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Nakamoto Y, Osman M, Cohade C. et al. PET/CT: comparison of quantitative tracer uptake between germanium and CT transmission attenuation-corrected images. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1137-43.
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Noßke D, Minkov V, Brix G. Festlegung und Anwendung diagnostischer Referenzwerte für nuklearmedizinische Untersuchungen. Nuklearmedizin 2004; 43: 79-84.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Pietrzyk U. Does PET/CT render software fusion obsolete. Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44 (Suppl. 01) S13-7.
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Czernin J. (ed). PET/CT: Imaging function and structure. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (suppl): 1S-103S.
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Schöder H, Erdi YE, Larson SM. et al. PET/CT: A new imaging technology in nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 1419-37.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Schulthess von GK. Cost considerations regarding an integrated CT-PET system. Eur Radiol 2000; 10 (Suppl. 03) S377-80.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Stamm-Meyer A, Nosske D, Schnell-Inderst P. et al. Diagnostic nuclear medicine procedures performed in Germany between 1996 and 2002: Application frequencies and collective effective doses. Nuklearmedizin (in press).
    Google Scholar
  • 37 Townsend DW, Beyer T, Blodgett TM. PET/CT scanners: A hardware approach to image fusion. Sem Nucl Med 2003; 33: 193-204.
    Google Scholar
  • 38 Vogel WV, Oyen WJ, Barentsz JO. et al. PET/CT: Panacea, redundancy, or something in between?. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (Suppl. 01) 15S-24S.
    Google Scholar
  • 39 Wu TH, Huang YH, Lee JJS. et al. Radiation exposure during transmisssion measurements: Comparison between CT- and germanium-based techniques with a current PET scanner. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31: 38-43.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Yau YY, Chan WS, Tam YM. et al. Application of intravenous contrast in PET/CT: Does it really introduce significant attenuation correction error?. J Nucl Med 2005; 46: 283-91.
    Google Scholar