Image-derived input function in dynamic human PET/CT: methodology and validation with 11C-acetate and 18F-fluorothioheptadecanoic acid in muscle and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in brain.
Image-derived input function in dynamic human PET/CT: methodology and validation with 11C-acetate and 18F-fluorothioheptadecanoic acid in muscle and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose in brain.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00259-010-1443-z
复制
发表时间：
2010-08
影响因子：
9.1
通讯作者：
Benard, Francois
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Croteau, Etienne;Lavallee, Eric;Labbe, Sebastien M.;Hubert, Laurent;Pifferi, Fabien;Rousseau, Jacques A.;Cunnane, Stephen C.;Carpentier, Andre C.;Lecomte, Roger;Benard, Francois
尽管目前PET/CT系统取得了进步，但血液采样仍然是获得示踪剂动力学建模的放射性示踪剂输入函数的标准方法。本研究的目的是验证使用颈动脉和股动脉的图像衍生输入功能（IDIF）来测量PET成像中的动脉输入功能（AIF）。数据来自两项不同的研究，一项使用18F-FDG进行脑成像，另一项使用11c -醋酸盐和18f -氟-6-硫庚烷酸（18F-FTHA）进行股肌成像。用两个仿真系统对该方法进行了验证。首先，使用由不同直径的含放射性注射器组成的静态模体来确定回收系数（RC）和泄漏因子。其次，建立一个动态模型来模拟大剂量注射和示踪剂的清除，以建立采血与AIF和IDIF之间的相关性。然后将RC应用于11c -乙酸酯和18F-FTHA PET成像研究中的股动脉数据，以及18F-FDG脑成像中的颈动脉数据。然后将这些IDIF数据与患者的实际aif进行比较。使用11C-acetate时，根据实际时间-活动血液曲线估计的股肌灌注指数为0.34±0.18 min - 1，根据校正后的IDIF估计的灌注指数为0.29±0.15 min - 1，而未校正RC的IDIF数据时，其灌注指数为0.66±0.41 min - 1。单向重复测量（ANOVA）和Tukey检验显示，未校正RC的IDIF差异有统计学意义（p<0.0001）。在18F-FTHA中，Patlak斜率、使用真实等离子体放射性含量计算的血浆到组织转移率和校正后的股肌IDIF之间存在很强的相关性（股外侧肌r=0.86, p=0.027；股二头肌r=0.90, p=0.017）。另一方面，使用AIF得出的值与使用未校正的IDIF得出的值之间没有相关性。最后，在使用18F-FDG的脑成像研究中，使用未校正的IDIF测量的脑葡萄糖代谢率（CMRglc）一直被高估。采用血液取样获得的CMRglc为13.1±3.9 mg/ 100g / min，采用校正后的IDIF获得的CMRglc为14.0±5.7 mg/ 100g / min （r2 =0.90）。正确获得的颈动脉和股动脉idif可以作为aif的替代品，在骨骼肌和脑分析中进行示踪动力学建模。
Despite current advances in PET/CT systems, blood sampling still remains the standard method to obtain the radiotracer input function for tracer kinetic modelling. The purpose of this study was to validate the use of image-derived input functions (IDIF) of the carotid and femoral arteries to measure the arterial input function (AIF) in PET imaging. The data were obtained from two different research studies, one using 18F-FDG for brain imaging and the other using 11C-acetate and 18F-fluoro-6-thioheptadecanoic acid (18F-FTHA) in femoral muscles. The method was validated with two phantom systems. First, a static phantom consisting of syringes of different diameters containing radioactivity was used to determine the recovery coefficient (RC) and spill-in factors. Second, a dynamic phantom built to model bolus injection and clearance of tracers was used to establish the correlation between blood sampling, AIF and IDIF. The RC was then applied to the femoral artery data from PET imaging studies with 11C-acetate and 18F-FTHA and to carotid artery data from brain imaging with 18F-FDG. These IDIF data were then compared to actual AIFs from patients. With 11C-acetate, the perfusion index in the femoral muscle was 0.34±0.18 min−1 when estimated from the actual time–activity blood curve, 0.29±0.15 min−1 when estimated from the corrected IDIF, and 0.66±0.41 min−1 when the IDIF data were not corrected for RC. A one-way repeated measures (ANOVA) and Tukey’s test showed a statistically significant difference for the IDIF not corrected for RC (p<0.0001). With 18F-FTHA there was a strong correlation between Patlak slopes, the plasma to tissue transfer rate calculated using the true plasma radioactivity content and the corrected IDIF for the femoral muscles (vastus lateralis r=0.86, p=0.027; biceps femoris r=0.90, p=0.017). On the other hand, there was no correlation between the values derived using the AIF and those derived using the uncorrected IDIF. Finally, in the brain imaging study with 18F-FDG, the cerebral metabolic rate of glucose (CMRglc) measured using the uncorrected IDIF was consistently overestimated. The CMRglc obtained using blood sampling was 13.1±3.9 mg/100 g per minute and 14.0±5.7 mg/100 g per minute using the corrected IDIF (r 2=0.90). Correctly obtained, carotid and femoral artery IDIFs can be used as a substitute for AIFs to perform tracer kinetic modelling in skeletal femoral muscles and brain analyses.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
Bentourkia, M;Croteau, É;Lecomte, R
通讯作者：
Lecomte, R
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Hussain, ST;Smith, RE;Bland, M
通讯作者：
Bland, M
影响因子：
1.3
作者：
KESSLER, RM;ELLIS, JR;EDEN, M
通讯作者：
EDEN, M
DOI：
10.1002/hed.10037
发表时间：
2002-02-01
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Brun, E;Kjellén, E;Strand, SE
通讯作者：
Strand, SE
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Mourik, Jurgen E. M.;van Velden, Floris H. P.;Boellaard, Ronald
通讯作者：
Boellaard, Ronald