Ordered subset expectation maximisation vs Bayesian penalised likelihood reconstruction algorithm in 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT

Background The aim of the study was to compare widely used ordered subset expectation maximisation (OSEM) algorithm with a new Bayesian penalised likelihood (BPL) Q.Clear algorithm in 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT. Methods We retrospectively assessed 25 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans with both OSEM and Q.Clear r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Annals of nuclear medicine Vol. 34; no. 3; pp. 192 - 199
Main Authors: Witkowska-Patena, Ewa, Budzyńska, Anna, Giżewska, Agnieszka, Dziuk, Mirosław, Walęcka-Mazur, Agata
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Singapore Springer Singapore 01.03.2020
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects:
Aged
Algorithms
Avidity
Bayes Theorem
Bayesian analysis
Computed tomography
Fluorine isotopes
Fluorine Radioisotopes - chemistry
Humans
Imaging
Lesions
Likelihood Functions
Localization
Maximization
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Middle Aged
Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Niacinamide - analogs & derivatives
Niacinamide - chemical synthesis
Niacinamide - metabolism
Nuclear Medicine
Oligopeptides - chemical synthesis
Oligopeptides - metabolism
Optimization
Original
Original Article
Physicians
Positron emission
Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography - methods
Prostate cancer
Radiology
Radiopharmaceuticals - chemical synthesis
Radiopharmaceuticals - metabolism
Retrospective Studies
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Statistical analysis
Tomography
Tumors
Q Clear
OSEM
Reconstruction algorithm
18F-PSMA-1007
Prostate cancer
PET/CT
ISSN:0914-7187, 1864-6433, 1864-6433
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background The aim of the study was to compare widely used ordered subset expectation maximisation (OSEM) algorithm with a new Bayesian penalised likelihood (BPL) Q.Clear algorithm in 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT. Methods We retrospectively assessed 25 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT scans with both OSEM and Q.Clear reconstructions available. Each scan was independently reported by two physicians both in OSEM and Q.Clear. SUVmax, SUVmean and tumour-to-background ratio (TBR) of each lesion were measured. Reports were also compared for their final conclusions and the number and localisation of lesions. Results In both reconstructions the same 87 lesions were reported. Mean SUVmax, SUVmean and TBR were higher for Q.Clear than OSEM (7.01 vs 6.53 [ p  = 0.052], 4.16 vs 3.84 [ p  = 0.036] and 20.2 vs 16.8 [ p  < 0.00001], respectively). Small lesions (< 10 mm) had statistically significant higher SUVmax, SUVmean and TBR in Q.Clear than OSEM (5.37 vs 4.79 [ p  = 0.032], 3.08 vs 2.70 [ p  = 0.04] and 15.5 vs 12.5 [ p  = 0.00214], respectively). For lesions ≥ 10 mm, no significant differences were observed. Findings with higher tracer avidity (SUVmax ≥ 5) tended to have higher SUVmax, SUVmean and TBR values in Q.Clear (11.6 vs 10.3 [ p  = 0.00278], 7.0 vs 6.7 [ p  = 0.077] and 33.9 vs 26.7 [ p  < 0.00001, respectively). Mean background uptake did not differ significantly between Q.Clear and OSEM (0.42 vs 0.39, p  = 0.07). Conclusions In 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT, Q.Clear SUVs and TBR tend to be higher (regardless of lesion localisation), especially for small and highly avid lesions. Increase in SUVs is also higher for lesions with high tracer uptake. Still, Q.Clear does not affect 18F-PSMA-1007 PET/CT specificity and sensitivity.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0914-7187
1864-6433
1864-6433
DOI:10.1007/s12149-019-01433-x