Control de calidad para PET/RM basado en maniquíes experimentales con evaluación de factores de degradación por movimiento respiratorio

Carmen Salvador-Ribés; África Almendros-Riaza; Consuelo Olivas; María del Pilar Morcillo-Toledo; Irene Torres-Espallardo; Sonia  Ginés-Cárdenas; Pilar Bello; Moisés Sáez-Beltrán; Luís Martí-Bonmatí; Montserrat Carles

doi:10.37004/sefm/2024.25.1.004

Authors

Carmen Salvador-Ribés Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España. https://orcid.org/0009-0003-2119-0771
África Almendros-Riaza Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España.
Consuelo Olivas Departamento de Medicina Nuclear, Área Clínica de Imagen Médica, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España.
María del Pilar Morcillo-Toledo Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España.
Irene Torres-Espallardo Departamento de Medicina Nuclear, Área Clínica de Imagen Médica, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4612-4629
Sonia Ginés-Cárdenas Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5625-9159
Pilar Bello Departamento de Medicina Nuclear, Área Clínica de Imagen Médica, Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0527-4409
Moisés Sáez-Beltrán Departamento de Física Médica, Hospital Universitario La Paz, 28046, Madrid, España. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9990-3941
Luís Martí-Bonmatí Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España.
Montserrat Carles Grupo de Investigación Biomédica en Imagen (GIBI230), Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe, 46026, Valencia, España. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2401-8240

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37004/sefm/2024.25.1.004

Keywords:

PET/MR, quality assurance, experimental phantoms, respiratory movement, attenuation correction

Abstract

This study aims to create a phantom-based quality control (QC) test for hybrid PET/MR systems. A method that minimises error in attenuation maps (AM) for PET/MR phantom measurements has been validated and implemented in the QC to assess the impact of different respiratory motion degradation factors.

The MRI-QUASAR-Motion phantom with 3D-printing inserts was employed as well as the Duetto tool to generate AMs from computed tomography (AM-CT) scans. Using recovery coefficients (RC), the impact of motion compensation on AMs, discrimination of irregular cycles and averaging for co-registered respiratory phases on PET images was quantified. No significant improvements were observed with motion compensation in the AMs (p = 0.31) or when discriminating irregular cycles (p = 0.16). There was also no significant difference between estimating the concentration in each respiratory phase and averaging its value (RC_{concentración} = 0.982 ± 0.013) or estimating it in the average image of the respiratory phases (RC_{concentración} = 0.978 ± 0.009).

Our QC test for PET/MR systems allows us to recommend avoiding the post-processing involved by the respiratory motion compensation in AMs, the discrimination of irregular respiratory cycles and the co-registration of respiratory phases.

References

Meikle SR, et al. Quantitative PET in the 2020s: a roadmap. Phys Med Biol. 2021;66(6). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/abd4f7

Zhu T, Das S, Wong TZ. Integration of PET/MR Hybrid Imaging into Radiation Therapy Treatment. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2017; 25(2):377-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mric.2017.01.001

Currie GM, Kamvosoulis P, Bushong S. PET/MRI, Part 2: Technologic Principles. J Nucl Med Technol. 2021; 49(3):217-225. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.120.261862

Balyasnikova S, et al. PET/MR in oncology: an introduction with focus on MR and future perspectives for hybrid imaging. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 2(4):458–474.

Lennie E, Tsoumpas C, Sourbron S. Multimodal phantoms for clinical PET/MRI. EJNMMI Physics. 2021; 8(62). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-021-00408-0

Akamatsu G, et al. A review of harmonization strategies for quantitative PET. Ann Nucl Med. 2023; 37(2):71-88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-022-01820-x

Ehman EC, et al. PET/MRI: Where might it replace PET/CT? J Magn Reson. 2017; 46(5):1247-1262. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmri.25711

Dutta J, et al. Pulmonary imaging using respiratory motion compensated simultaneous PET/MR. Med Phys. 2015; 42(7):4227-4240. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4921616

Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-Volume Effect in PET Tumor Imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(6):932–945. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.106.035774

Carles M, et al. Evaluation of PET texture features with heterogeneous phantoms: complementarity and effect of motion and segmentation method. Phys Med Biol. 2017; 62(2):652.

Ionascu D, et al. Internal-external correlation investigations of respiratory induced motion of lung tumors. Med. Phys. 2007; 34(10):3893-3903. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2779941

Carles M, et al. Significance of the impact of motion compensation on the variability of PET image features. Phys Med Biol. 2018; 63(6):065013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aab180

Mancosu P, et al. 4D-PET data sorting into different number of phases: a NEMA IQ phantom study. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009; 10(4):220-231. https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v10i4.2917

Dawood M, et al. Respiratory gating in positron emission tomography: A quantitative comparison of different gating schemes. Med Phys. 2007; 34(7):3067-3076. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2748104

Kesner AL, et al. Validation of Software Gating: A Practical Technology for Respiratory Motion Correction in PET. Radiology. 2016; 281(1):239-248. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2016152105

Chang G, et al. Joint correction of respiratory motion artifact and partial volume effect in lung/thoracic PET/CT imaging. Med Phys. 2010; 37(12):6221-6232. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3512780

Frood R, McDermott G, Scarsbrook A. Respiratory-gated PET/CT for pulmonary lesion characterisation-promises and problems. Br J Radiol. 2018; 91(1086):20170640. https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr.20170640

Martinez-Movilla A, et al. Comparison of protocols with respiratory-gated (4D) motion compensation in PET/CT: open-source package for quantification of phantom image quality. EJNMMI Phys. 2022; 9(80). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-022-00509-4

Modus Medical Devices. QUASAR MRI Motion Phantom. [Consultado 30 jul 2023]. Disponible en: https://modusqa.com/products/quasar-mri4d-motion-phantom/

Park SJ, et al. Evaluation of the combined effects of target size, respiratory motion and background activity on 3D and 4D PET/CT images. Phys Med Biol. 2008; 53(13):3661–3679.

Carles M, et al. 4D FDG-PET quantification in thoracic anatomical structures for anthropomorphic phantom measurements. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Medical Imaging Conf. 2014:1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2014.7430816

Grant AM, et al. NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system. Med Phys. 2016; 43(5):2334-2343. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4945416

Surti S, et al. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT Scanner with Special Consideration for Its Time-of-Flight Imaging Capabilities. J Nucl Med. 2007; 48(3):471-480.

Saborido-Moral JD, et al. Free automatic software for the quality assurance of CT metrics reproducibility: calibration, edges and radiomics. Phys Med. 2023; 114:103153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.103153

Ziegler S, et al. NEMA image quality phantom measurements and attenuation correction in integrated PET/MR hybrid imaging. EJNMMI Physics. 2015; 2(18). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40658-015-0122-3

Aide N, et al. EANM/EARL harmonization strategies in PET quantification: from daily practice to multicentre oncological studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2017; 44(1):17-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-017-3740-2

Nyflot MJ. et al. Impact of CT attenuation correction method on quantitative respiratory-correlated (4D) PET/CT imaging. Med Phys. 2015; 42(1):110–120. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4903282

Cui Y, Bowsher J, Cai J. Impact of moving target on measurement accuracy in 3D and 4D PET imaging—a phantom study. Adv Radiat Oncol. 2017; 2(1):94-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2016.12.002

Pönisch F, et al. Attenuation correction of four dimensional (4D) PET using phase-correlated 4D-computed tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2008; 53(13):N259–N268. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/13/N03

Nagel CC, et al. Phased attenuation correction in respiration correlated computed tomography/positron emitted tomography. Med Phys. 2006; 33(6):1840–1847. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2198170

Lu Y, et al. Respiratory Motion Compensation for PET/CT with Motion Information Derived from Matched Attenuation-Corrected Gated PET Data. J Nucl Med. 2018; 59(9):1480–1486. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.117.203000

Nii T, et al. Evaluation of Data-Driven Respiration Gating in Continuous Bed Motion in Lung Lesions. J Nucl Med Technol. 2023; 51(1):32-37. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnmt.122.264909