title: Motion artifacts occurring at the lung/diaphragm interface using 4D CT attenuation correction of 4D PET scans.
abstract: For PET/CT, fast CT acquisition time can lead to errors in attenuation correction, particularly at the lung/diaphragm interface. Gated 4D PET can reduce motion artifacts, though residual artifacts may persist depending on the CT dataset used for attenuation correction. We performed phantom studies to evaluate 4D PET images of targets near a density interface using three different methods for attenuation correction: a single 3D CT (3D CTAC), an averaged 4D CT (CINE CTAC), and a fully phase matched 4D CT (4D CTAC). A phantom was designed with two density regions corresponding to diaphragm and lung. An 8 mL sphere phantom loaded with 18F-FDG was used to represent a lung tumor and background FDG included at an 8:1 ratio. Motion patterns of sin(x) and sin4(x) were used for dynamic studies. Image data was acquired using a GE Discovery DVCT-PET/CT scanner. Attenuation correction methods were compared based on normalized recovery coefficient (NRC), as well as a novel quantity "fixed activity volume" (FAV) introduced in our report. Image metrics were compared to those determined from a 3D PET scan with no motion present (3D STATIC). Values of FAV and NRC showed significant variation over the motion cycle when corrected by 3D CTAC images. 4D CTAC- and CINE CTAC-corrected PET images reduced these motion artifacts. The amount of artifact reduction is greater when the target is surrounded by lower density material and when motion was based on sin4(x). 4D CTAC reduced artifacts more than CINE CTAC for most scenarios. For a target surrounded by water equivalent material, there was no advantage to 4D CTAC over CINE CTAC when using the sin(x) motion pattern. Attenuation correction using both 4D CTAC or CINE CTAC can reduce motion artifacts in regions that include a tissue interface such as the lung/diaphragm border. 4D CTAC is more effective than CINE CTAC at reducing artifacts in some, but not all, scenarios.
authors.affiliation: Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women’s Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA. jkilloran@lroc.harvard.edu
authors.forename: Joseph H
authors.initials: JH
authors.lastname: Killoran
authors.forename: Victor H
authors.initials: VH
authors.lastname: Gerbaudo
authors.forename: Marcelo
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Mamede
authors.forename: Dan
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Ionascu
authors.forename: Sang-June
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Park
authors.forename: Ross
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Berbeco
mesh_terms: D000465:Algorithms; D016477:Artifacts; D003964:Diaphragm / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D056973:Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography / Q000379:methods*; D007090:Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted / Q000379:methods; D008168:Lung / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008175:Lung Neoplasms / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D009038:Motion; D049268:Positron-Emission Tomography / Q000379:methods; D015203:Reproducibility of Results
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002 Jul 15;53(4):822-34
references.pmid: 12095547
references.citation: Med Phys. 2008 Feb;35(2):576-85
references.pmid: 18383679
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 Apr;30(4):588-96
references.pmid: 12582813
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2005 Sep;46(9):1481-7
references.pmid: 16157531
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2007 Jun;48(6):910-9
references.pmid: 17504865
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 May 1;59(1):78-86
references.pmid: 15093902
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008 Nov;35(11):1981-8
references.pmid: 18682940
references.citation: Radiology. 2003 Mar;226(3):906-10
references.pmid: 12616024
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2007 May;48(5):849; author reply 847
references.pmid: 17475975
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2004 Aug;45(8):1287-92
references.pmid: 15299050
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2008 Jul 7;53(13):3661-79
references.pmid: 18562782
references.citation: Med Phys. 2005 Jul;32(7):2358-62
references.pmid: 16121593
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 Apr;30(4):603-6
references.pmid: 12536242
references.citation: Semin Nucl Med. 2008 May;38(3):167-76
references.pmid: 18396177
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2008 Jul 7;53(13):N259-68
references.pmid: 18562779
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003 May;30(5):721-6
references.pmid: 12612809
references.citation: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2005 Dec;32(12):1422-8
references.pmid: 16133387
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2009 Dec 21;54(24):7345-62
references.pmid: 19926910
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 Nov 15;63(4):1016-23
references.pmid: 15979817
references.citation: Phys Med Biol. 2005 Apr 7;50(7):1569-83
references.pmid: 15798344
references.citation: Med Phys. 2006 Oct;33(10):3931-8
references.pmid: 17089855
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2006 Nov;47(11):1808-12
references.pmid: 17079814
references.citation: J Nucl Med. 2007 May;48(5):794-801
references.pmid: 17475969
references.citation: Radiother Oncol. 2009 Apr;91(1):85-94
references.pmid: 19100641
references.citation: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Mar 15;70(4):1035-8
references.pmid: 17996383
references.citation: Med Phys. 2004 Dec;31(12):3179-86
references.pmid: 15651600
references.citation: Radiother Oncol. 2006 Nov;81(2):209-25
references.pmid: 17064802
references.citation: Med Phys. 2003 Oct;30(10):2643-9
references.pmid: 14596301