Nonrigid versus rigid registration of thoracic 18F-FDG PET and CT in patients with lung cancer: An intraindividual comparison of different breathing maneuvers

18Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In lung cancer, 18F-FDG PET, CT, and 18F-FDG PET/CT are used for noninvasive staging and therapy planning. Even with improved image registration techniques - especially in the modern hybrid PET/CT scanners - inaccuracies in the fusion process may occur, leading to errors in image interpretation. The aim of this study was to investigate by an intraindividual analysis whether, in comparison with a rigid algorithm, a nonrigid registration algorithm improves the quality of fusion between 18F-FDG PET and CT. Methods: Sixteen patients with histologically proven non-small cell lung cancer underwent a thoracic 18FFDG PET acquisition in radiotherapy treatment position and 3 CT acquisitions (expiration, inspiration, and mid breath-hold) on the same day. All scans were registered with rigid and nonrigid procedures, resulting in 6 fused datasets: rigid inspiration, rigid expiration, rigid mid breath-hold, nonrigid inspiration, nonrigid expiration, and nonrigid mid breath-hold. The quality of alignment was assessed by 3 experienced readers at 8 anatomic landmarks: lung apices, aortic arch, heart, spine, sternum, carina, diaphragm, and tumor using an alignment score ranging from 1 (no alignment) to 5 (exact alignment). Results: Nonrigid PET/CT showed better alignment than rigid PET/CT (3.5 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 ± 0.7, P < 0.001). Regarding the breathing maneuver, no difference between nonrigid mid breath-hold and rigid mid breath-hold was observed. In contrast, the alignment quality significantly improved from rigid expiration to nonrigid expiration (3.4 ± 0.7 vs. 3.6 ± 0.7, P < 0.001) and from rigid inspiration to nonrigid inspiration (3.1 ± 0.7 vs. 3.3 < 0.7, P < 0.001). With regard to individual landmarks, an improvement in fusion quality through the use of nonrigid registration was obvious at the lung apices, carina, and aortic arch. Conclusion: The alignment quality of thoracic 18F-FDG PET/CT exhibits a marked dependence on the breathing maneuver performed during the CT acquisition, as demonstrated in an intraindividual comparison. Nonrigid registration is a significant improvement over rigid registration if the CT is performed during full inspiration or full expiration. The best fusion results are obtained with the CT performed at mid breath-hold using rigid registration, without an improvement using nonrigid algorithms. Copyright © 2009 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Grgic, A., Nestle, U., Schaefer-Schuler, A., Kremp, S., Ballek, E., Fleckenstein, J., … Hellwig, D. (2009). Nonrigid versus rigid registration of thoracic 18F-FDG PET and CT in patients with lung cancer: An intraindividual comparison of different breathing maneuvers. Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 50(12), 1921–1926. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.109.065649

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