:: Volume 21, Issue 1 (1-2023) ::
Int J Radiat Res 2023, 21(1): 31-36 Back to browse issues page
The effect of patients’ body mass indices on PET/CT images with 68Ga-labeled prostate-specific membrane antigen on a TruFlight PET/CT system
Y. Parlak , G. Mutevelizade , C. Sezgin , D. Goksoy , G. Gumuser , E. Sayit
Department of Nuclear Medicine, Manisa, Turkey , yasemin.gultekin@hotmail.com
Abstract:   (681 Views)
Background: The aim of our study was to determine the appropriate scanning time for 68Ga-labeled PSMA PET/CT imaging by using the BMI of the patients. Materials and Methods: Fifty-seven patients who were included to the study were divided into 4 groups according to their BMI. In addition to the routine imaging protocol, further imaging focused on the patient’s liver was performed. PET images were reconstructed from the reference image obtained for the images at 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, and 300 s/bp. To evaluate PET/CT with 68Ga-PSMA image quality, SNRnorm was calculated using the SNR in the liver. The correlations and differences between scanning times according to BMI were calculated. Results: The SUVmax values of the reconstructed images were obtained and the changes observed in SUVmax were statistically significant (p<0.05). Our results showed that the SUVmax in the liver decreases with increasing scan time. We calculated that SNR decreased with scan time in all groups. The SNR difference was statistically significant only for 60 and 90 s/bp (p=0.045, p=0.02, respectively). No difference in SNRnorm values was determined between the groups (p≥0.05). Conclusion: If the same amount of radioactivity is injected into patients, the liver SUVmax of the overweight patient would be expected to be higher than underweights. Since SUV calculations are standardized according to body weight, BMI and body composition may cause variability in SUV measurements. As the BMI increased, the background activity in 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT images improved. However, due to the longer imaging time, patient movement should be considered.
Keywords: 68Ga PSMA, PET/CT, Imaging Quality, SNR.
Full-Text [PDF 813 kb]   (891 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Radiation Biology
1. Sivrikoz IA (2018) Possible Role of Ga-68 PSMA PET/CT in Evaluation of Systemic Treatment Response in Patients with Metastatic Prostate Cancer. Nucl Med Semin, 4: 231-239. [DOI:10.4274/nts.2018.026]
2. Garcia Garzon JR, Torres MA, Bolton RD, Ceci F, Ruiz AS, Rincón OJ (2018) Oncology Task Force of Spanish Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. 68Ga-PSMA PET/CT in prostate cancer. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol, 37(2): 130-138. [DOI:10.1016/j.remnie.2017.10.016] [PMID]
3. Wells RG (2016) Instrumentation in molecular imaging, J Nucl Cardiol, 23: 1343-7. [DOI:10.1007/s12350-016-0498-z] [PMID]
4. Huo L, Nan L, Wu H, Zhu W, Xing H, Ba J (2018) Performance evaluation of a new highsensitivity time-of-flight clinical PET/CT system. EJNMMI Physics, 5: 29. [DOI:10.1186/s40658-018-0229-4] [PMID] []
5. Cox CPW, Segbers M, Graven LH, Brabander T, Danielle ME (2020) Standardized image quality for 68Ga-DOTATATE PET/CT. EJNMMI Research, 10: 27. [DOI:10.1186/s13550-020-0601-y] [PMID] []
6. Halpern BJ, Dahlbom M, Auerbach MA, Schiepers C, Fueger BJ, Weber WA (2005) Optimizing Imaging Protocols for Overweight and Obese Patients: A Lutetium Orthosilicate. J Nucl Med, 46: 603-607.
7. De Groot EH, Post N, Boellaard R, Wagenaar NRL, Willemsen ATM , van Dalen JA (2013) Optimized dose regimen for whole-body FDG-PET imaging. EJNMMI Research, 3: 63-73. [DOI:10.1186/2191-219X-3-63] [PMID] []
8. Van Sluis J, Boellaard R, Dierckx RAJ, Stormezand GN, Glaudemans AW, Noordzij W (2020) Image quality and activity optimization in oncologic 18F-FDG PET using the digital biograph vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med, 61(5): 764-771. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.119.234351] [PMID]
9. Sezgin C, Parlak Y, Mutevelizade G, Gumuser G, Sayıt E (2021) Quantitative evaluation of FDG PET imaging. CBU-SBED, 8(1): 69-173. [DOI:10.34087/cbusbed.804272]
10. Masuda Y, Kondo C, Matsuo Y, Uetani M, Kusakabe K (2009) Comparison of imaging protocols for 18F-FDG PET/CT in overweight patients: Optimizing scan duration versus administered dose. J Nucl Med, 50: 844-848. [DOI:10.2967/jnumed.108.060590] [PMID]
11. Ural D, Kılıckap M, Goksuluk H, Karaaslan D, Kayıkcıoglu M, Ozer N (2018) Data on prevalence of obesity and waist circumference in Turkey: Systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of epidemiological studies on cardiovascular risk factors. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars, 46(7): 577-590. [DOI:10.5543/tkda.2018.62200] [PMID]
12. Kim JH (2016) Comparison of the EORTC criteria and PERCIST in solid tumors: a pooled analysis and review. Oncotarget, 7: 58105- 58110. [DOI:10.18632/oncotarget.11171] [PMID] []
13. Boztoprak H (2016) An alternative image quality assessment method for blurred images. Balkan Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 4(1): 46-50. [DOI:10.17694/bajece.24838]
14. Keramida G and Peters M (2020) FDG PET/CT of the non-malignant liver in an increasingly obese world population. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging, 40: 304-319. [DOI:10.1111/cpf.12651] [PMID]
15. Zhang YQ, Hu PC, Wu RZ, Gu YS, Chen SG, Yu HJ, Wang XO, Song J, Shi HC (2020) The image quality, lesion detectability, and acquisition time of 18F-FDG total-body PET/CT in oncological patients. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, 47: 2507-2515. [DOI:10.1007/s00259-020-04823-w] [PMID]
16. Pilz J, Hehenwarter L, Zimmermann G, Rendl G, Zwink GS, Beheshti M and Pirich C (2021) Feasibility of equivalent performance of 3D TOF [18F]-FDG PET/CT with reduced acquisition time using clinical and semiquantitative parameters. EJNMMI Res, 11: 44-55. [DOI:10.1186/s13550-021-00784-9] [PMID] []

XML     Print

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 21, Issue 1 (1-2023) Back to browse issues page