Deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT of lung cancer: Maximum standardized uptake value analysis of 108 patients

76Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Our aim was to compare the maximum standardized uptake value (SUVmax) between breath-hold (BH) PET/CT and free-breathing (FB) PET/CT. Methods: The features of phantom data were analyzed, after which a clinical study was performed. A total of 108 consecutive patients with lung cancer were examined using lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO)-based PET/CT. The patients were instructed to breathe freely during FB PET/CT. In BH PET/CT, the patients were instructed to hold their breath in the maximal inspiration position during the scout scan, for 10 s of the CT scan, and for as long as possible during the PET scan. BH time was recorded using a respiratory monitoring device. The %BH-index was defined as the percentage difference between SUVmax of FB PET and that of BH PET. Statistical analyses were performed using the following factors: %BH-index, age, body mass index, 18F-FDG dosage, blood glucose, BH time, lesion size, and location. Results: The highest %BH-index was 223.2. %BH-index in the lower lung area was significantly higher than that in the upper lung area (51.8 ± 49.5 vs. 16.9 ± 25.6, respectively). Lesion volume and maximum diameter in the high-%BH-index group were significantly lower than those in the low-%BH-index group, with the use of a %BH-index cutoff value of 37.l. Conclusion: SUVmax of FB PET should not be taken as accurate, especially in the lower lung area and for small pulmonary lesions. BH PET/CT is expected to enable precise measurement of SUVmax and is thus recommended as part of the standard protocol for lung cancer. Copyright © 2008 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kawano, T., Ohtake, E., & Inoue, T. (2008). Deep-inspiration breath-hold PET/CT of lung cancer: Maximum standardized uptake value analysis of 108 patients. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 49(8), 1223–1231. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.107.049296

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free