Abstract
Objective
Many studies have documented the clinical usefulness of standardized uptake values (SUV) for diagnosis. However, in the event of injection error, accurate measurements cannot be obtained if the radioactivity of fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) leakage is not subtracted from the administered dosage. Here, a correction formula for radioactivity estimation that takes into account the radioactivity of FDG leakage was derived on the basis of a phantom experiment. Furthermore, to determine whether SUV could be accurately calculated by the correction formula, we performed a volunteer study.
Methods
Images were displayed by altering the conversion constant from 1.0, 0.1 to 0.01, and the range of correctable counts was verified on the basis of image inversion. To estimate the radioactivity of FDG leakage by imaging, the count of the leakage was measured, converted into a radioactivity concentration using a cross-calibration factor (CCF), and multiplied by volume, as measured by imaging. Three factors that markedly affect count, i.e., count rate performance, partial volume effect and crosstalk, were assessed in phantom studies in order to derive a correction formula. In addition, to clarify the accuracy of the correction formula, we attached to the right elbow.
Results
With a conversion constant of 0.1, there was no image inversion at ≤1.565 MBq/ml. At concentrations below this, the average detection rate was 90%. This suggests that count rate performance can be corrected at ≤1.0 MBq/ml. Crosstalk investigations clarified that the effects of adjacent radioactivity concentrations on FDG leakage were not marked. On the basis of investigations on partial volume effect and count rate performance, the following formulas were derived:
For leakages of ≥28 mm
Leakage radioactivity (MBq) = positron emission tomography (PET) radioactivity (MBq) × 0.9.
For leakages of ≥15 mm but <28 mm
Leakage radioactivity (MBq) = PET radioactivity (MBq) × 0.9 × (0.0517 × leakage size (mm) − 0.4029).
In a volunteer study with 10 MBq leakage, SUV recalculated using the formula achieved 99.97% correction, whereas with 100 MBq leakage, SUV achieved 67.5% resulting in poor correction.
Conclusions
The present correction technique can accurately calculate SUV and could be useful for the clinical diagnosis of malignant tumors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
S Abe M Nishino M Yamashita H Yamaguchi (2003) ArticleTitleExamination of SUV of regional activity concentration for simultaneous emission/transmission acquisition using the mask technique Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 59 632–9 Occurrence Handle12881694
MA Lodge RD Badawi PK Marsden (1998) ArticleTitleA clinical evaluation of the quantitative accuracy of simultaneous emission/transmission scanning in whole-body positron emission tomography Eur J Nucl Med 25 417–23 Occurrence Handle9553172 Occurrence Handle10.1007/s002590050240 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1c3itFSqtw%3D%3D
JW Keyes SuffixJr (1995) ArticleTitleSUV: Standard uptake or silly useless value? J Nucl Med 36 1836–9 Occurrence Handle7562051
HN Greuter R Boellaard A van Lingen EJ Franssen AA Lammertsma (2003) ArticleTitleMeasurement of 18F-FDG concentrations in blood samples: comparison of direct calibration and standard solution methods J Nucl Med Technol 31 206–9 Occurrence Handle14657286 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2cXhsVOktLc%3D
InstitutionalAuthorNameSubcommittee on Medical Application of Cyclotron-Produced Radionuclides, Medical and Pharmaceutical Committee, Japan Radioisotope Association (1994) ArticleTitleGuideline for performance evaluation of positron emission tomographs Radioisotopes 43 115–35
Performance evaluation method of Japan Industries Association of Radiation Apparatus standard JESRA x-73: PET device 1993
K Inoue T Sato H Kitamura A Hirayama M Fukushi H Kurosawa et al. (2006) ArticleTitleExamination of PET image evaluation experimentation method aiming at improved accuracy of data acquisition Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 62 1449–55 Occurrence Handle17065961
EVR Di Bella DJ Kadrmas PE Christian (2001) ArticleTitleFeasibility of dual-isotope coincidence/single-photon imaging of the myocardium cardiac imaging J Nucl Med 42 944–50 Occurrence Handle11390561 Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3MzitVajtA%3D%3D
F Nakamura T Kanno H Okada E Yoshikawa I Andou M Futatsubashi et al. (2006) ArticleTitleMeasurement of radiation exposure to a PET institution driver from patients injected with FDG Nippon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 62 1105–10 Occurrence Handle16957665
A Matthies M Hickeson A Cuchiara (2002) ArticleTitleDual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules J Nucl Med 43 871–5 Occurrence Handle12097455
A Imdahl E Nitzsche F Krautmann (1999) ArticleTitleEvaluation of positron emission tomography with 2-[18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose for the differentiation of chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer Br J Surg 86 194–9 Occurrence Handle10100786 Occurrence Handle10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01016.x Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DyaK1M7pvVyrtw%3D%3D
Y Nakamoto T Higashi H Sakahara (2000) ArticleTitleDelayed (18)F-fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography scan for differentiation between malignant and benign lesions in the pancreas Cancer 89 2547–54 Occurrence Handle11135214 Occurrence Handle10.1002/1097-0142(20001215)89:12<2547::AID-CNCR5>3.0.CO;2-V Occurrence Handle1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M7gvValtg%3D%3D
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Miyashita, K., Takahashi, N., Oka, T. et al. SUV correction for injection errors in FDG-PET examination. Ann Nucl Med 21, 607–613 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-007-0068-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-007-0068-1