These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: CT attenuation correction for myocardial perfusion quantification using a PET/CT hybrid scanner.
    Author: Koepfli P, Hany TF, Wyss CA, Namdar M, Burger C, Konstantinidis AV, Berthold T, Von Schulthess GK, Kaufmann PA.
    Journal: J Nucl Med; 2004 Apr; 45(4):537-42. PubMed ID: 15073247.
    Abstract:
    UNLABELLED: In routine PET, a 10- to 20-min transmission scan with a rotating (68)Ge source is commonly obtained for attenuation correction (AC). AC is time-consuming using this procedure and could considerably be shortened by instead using a rapid CT scan. Our aim was to evaluate the feasibility of CT AC in quantitative myocardial perfusion PET using a hybrid PET/CT scanner. METHODS: (13)N-labeled NH(3) and PET were used to measure myocardial blood flow (MBF) (mL/min/g) at rest and during standard adenosine stress. In group 1 (n = 7), CT scans (0.5 s) of the heart area with different tube currents (10, 40, 80, and 120 mA) were compared with a standard (68)Ge transmission (20 min) and with no AC. In group 2 (n = 3), the repeatability of 8 consecutive CT scans at a tube current of 10 mA was assessed. In group 3 (n = 4), emission was preceded and followed by 3 CT scans (10 mA) and 1 (68)Ge scan for each patient. For reconstruction, filtered backprojection (FBP) was compared with iterative reconstruction (IT). RESULTS: For group 1, no significant difference in mean MBF for resting and hyperemic scans was found when emission reconstructed with (68)Ge AC was compared with emission reconstructed with CT AC at any of the different tube currents. Only emission without any correction differed significantly from (68)Ge AC. For group 2, repeated measurements revealed a coefficient of variance ranging from 2% to 5% and from 2% to 6% at rest and at stress, respectively. For group 3, similar reproducibility coefficients (RC) for MBF were obtained when (68)Ge AC(FBP) was compared with (68)Ge AC(IT) (RC = 0.218) and when CT AC(FBP) was compared with CT AC(IT) (RC = 0.227). Even better reproducibility (lower RC) was found when (68)Ge AC(FBP) was compared with CT AC(FBP) (RC = 0.130) and when (68)Ge AC(IT) was compared with CT AC(IT) (RC = 0.146). CONCLUSION: Our study shows that for the assessment of qualitative and quantitative MBF with a hybrid PET/CT scanner, the use of CT AC (with a tube current of 10 mA) instead of (68)Ge AC provides accurate results.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]