17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Repeatability of the Maximum Standard Uptake Value (SUVmax) in FDG PET Translated title: FDG PET’te Maximum Standard Uptake Değerinin (SUVmax) Tekrarlanabilirliği

      research-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective: SUV max is often calculated at FDG PET examinations in systematic studies as well as at clinical examinations. Since SUV max represents a very small portion of a lesion it may be questioned how statistically reliable the figure is. This was studied by assessing the repeatability of SUV max between two FDG acquisitions acquired immediately upon each other in patients with chest lesions.

          Methods: In 100 clinical patients with a known chest lesion, two identical 3 min PET registrations (PET1 and PET2, respectively) were initiated within 224±31 sec of each other. The difference in SUV max between the lesion for the two PET scans (ΔSUVmax) was calculated and the uncertainty expressed as the coefficient of variation, CV (%). The correlation between ΔSUV max and the lowest SUV max from PET1 or PET2, the approximate metabolic lesion volume, the time from FDG injection to PET1 and the time between PET1 and PET2, respectively, was also assessed.

          Results: In 56 patients SUV max increased at the second acquisition and in 44 patients it decreased. Mean of SUV max was 7.8±6.1 and 7.8±6.2 for PET1 and PET2, respectively. The mean percentage difference was 0.9±7.8. The difference was not significant (p=0.20). CV gave an uncertainty of 4.3% between the two measurements which is a strong indicator of equivalence. There was no correlation between ΔSUV max and any of the assessed four parameters. The difference between the acquisitions, 0.9%, was much lower compared to the 3 previous published similar, but more restricted studies where the difference was 2.5-8.2%.

          Conclusion: From camera and computational perspectives, SUV max is a stable parameter

          Conflict of interest:None declared.

          Translated abstract

          Amaç: Sistematik çalışmalarda ya da klinikte yapılan muayenelerde yapılan FDG PET çalışmalarında SUV max sıklıkla hesaplanmaktadır. SUV max bir lezyonun küçük bir parçasını temsil etttiği için, bu rakamın istatstiksel olarak güvenilirliği sorgulanabilir. Bu amaçla toraks lezyonu olan hastalarda derhal ardarda yapılan iki FDG PET çekimlerinde SUV max’ın tekrarlanabilirliği araştırılmıştır.

          Yöntem: Bilinen toraks lezyonu olan 100 hastada, iki eşdeğer 3 dakikalık PET çekimi (sırasıyla, PET1 ve PET2) aralarında 224±31 saniye olacak şekilde gerçekleştirildi. İki PET taraması arasında lezyondaki SUV max farkı (ΔSUV max) hesaplandı ve belirsizlik varyasyon katsayısı (CV (%)) olarak ifade edildi. ΔSUV max ile; PET1 veya PET2 deki en düşük SUV max değeri, yaklaşık metabolik lezyon hacmi, FDG enjeksiyonundan PET1 e kadar geçen zaman ve PET1 ve PET2 arasındaki süre arasındaki korelasyon hesaplandı.

          Bulgular: İkinci çekimde, 56 hastada SUV max arttı, 44 hastada azaldı. Ortalama SUV max PET1’de 7.8±6.1, PET2’de 7.8±6.2 idi. Ortalama yüzde fark 0.9±7.8 idi. Fark önemli bulunmadı (p=0.20). İki ölçüm arasında CV’nin verdiği belirsizlik %4.3 idi ve eşdeğerliğin kuvvetli bir göstergesiydi. ΔSUV max ile diğer araştırılan dört parametre arasında korelasyon görülmedi. %0.9 olarak bulunan iki çekim arası fark değeri, daha önce yayınlanan 3 benzer ancak daha kısıtlı çalışmalarda bulunan farklara (%2.5-8.2) göre daha düşüktü.

          Sonuç: Kamera ve hesaplama açısından SUV max stabil bir parametredir.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study.

          Semiquantitative standard uptake values (SUVs) are used for tumor diagnosis and response monitoring. However, the accuracy of the SUV and the accuracy of relative change during treatment are not well documented. Therefore, an experimental and simulation study was performed to determine the effects of noise, image resolution, and region-of-interest (ROI) definition on the accuracy of SUVs. Experiments and simulations are based on thorax phantoms with tumors of 10-, 15-, 20-, and 30-mm diameter and background ratios (TBRs) of 2, 4, and 8. For the simulation study, sinograms were generated by forward projection of the phantoms. For each phantom, 50 sinograms were generated at 3 noise levels. All sinograms were reconstructed using ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) with 2 iterations and 16 subsets, with or without a 6-mm gaussian filter. For each tumor, the maximum pixel value and the average of a 50%, a 70%, and an adaptive isocontour threshold ROI were derived as well as with an ROI of 15 x 15 mm. The accuracy of SUVs was assessed using the average of 50 ROI values. Treatment response was simulated by varying the tumor size or the TBR. For all situations, a strong correlation was found between maximum and isocontour-based ROI values resulting in similar dependencies on image resolution and noise of all studied SUV measures. A strong variation with tumor size of > or =50% was found for all SUV values. For nonsmoothed data with high noise levels this variation was primarily due to noise, whereas for smoothed data with low noise levels partial-volume effects were most important. In general, SUVs showed under- and overestimations of > or =50% and depended on all parameters studied. However, SUV ratios, used for response monitoring, were only slightly dependent of ROI definition but were still affected by noise and resolution. The poor accuracy of the SUV under various conditions may hamper its use for diagnosis, especially in multicenter trials. SUV ratios used to measure response to treatment, however, are less dependent on noise, image resolution, and ROI definition. Therefore, the SUV might be more suitable for response-monitoring purposes.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Statistical Methods for Medical and Biological Students

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value?

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Mol Imaging Radionucl Ther
                MIRT
                Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy
                Galenos Publishing
                2146-1414
                2146-1414
                February 2014
                5 February 2014
                : 23
                : 1
                : 16-20
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Karolinska University Hospital, Department of Radiology, Stockholm, Sweden
                [2 ] Karolinska University Hospital, Department of Hospital Physics, Stockholm, Sweden
                Author notes
                * Address for Correspondence: Stockholm 17176 Stockholm - Sweden Phone: +46 85 177 92 66 E-mail: henry.lindholm@ 123456karolinska.se
                Article
                1175
                10.4274/Mirt.76376
                3957966
                24653930
                c7dd659f-f43a-4579-af4d-fe291514f78b
                © Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, Published by Galenos Publishing.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 20 November 2013
                : 23 December 2013
                Categories
                Original Article

                examinations and diagnoses,positron-emission tomography,fluorodeoxyglucose f18,reproducibility of results

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log