Bellevre Dimitri, Blanc Fournier Cécile, Switsers Odile, Dugué Audrey Emmanuelle, Levy Christelle, Allouache Djelila, Desmonts Cédric, Crouet Hubert, Guilloit Jean-Marc, Grellard Jean-Michel, Aide Nicolas
Nuclear Medicine Department, François Baclesse Cancer Centre, Avenue Général Harris, 14076, Cedex 5, Caen, France.
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2014 Jun;41(6):1103-12. doi: 10.1007/s00259-014-2689-7. Epub 2014 Feb 22.
Point spread function (PSF) reconstruction improves spatial resolution throughout the entire field of view of a PET system and can detect smaller metastatic deposits than conventional algorithms such as OSEM. We assessed the impact of PSF reconstruction on quantitative values and diagnostic accuracy for axillary staging of breast cancer patients, compared with an OSEM reconstruction, with emphasis on the size of nodal metastases.
This was a prospective study in a single referral centre in which 50 patients underwent an (18)F-FDG PET examination before axillary lymph node dissection. PET data were reconstructed with an OSEM algorithm and PSF reconstruction, analysed blindly and validated by a pathologist who measured the largest nodal metastasis per axilla. This size was used to evaluate PET diagnostic performance.
On pathology, 34 patients (68%) had nodal involvement. Overall, the median size of the largest nodal metastasis per axilla was 7 mm (range 0.5 - 40 mm). PSF reconstruction detected more involved nodes than OSEM reconstruction (p = 0.003). The mean PSF to OSEM SUVmax ratio was 1.66 (95 % CI 1.01 - 2.32). The sensitivities of PSF and OSEM reconstructions were, respectively, 96% and 92% in patients with a largest nodal metastasis of >7 mm, 60% and 40% in patients with a largest nodal metastasis of ≤7 mm, and 92% and 69% in patients with a primary tumour ≤30 mm. Biggerstaff graphical comparison showed that globally PSF reconstruction was superior to OSEM reconstruction. The median sizes of the largest nodal metastasis in patients with nodal involvement not detected by either PSF or OSEM reconstruction, detected by PSF but not by OSEM reconstruction and detected by both reconstructions were 3, 6 and 16 mm (p = 0.0064) respectively. In patients with nodal involvement detected by PSF reconstruction but not by OSEM reconstruction, the smallest detectable metastasis was 1.8 mm.
As a result of better activity recovery, PET with PSF reconstruction performed better than PET with OSEM reconstruction in detecting nodal metastases ≤7 mm. However, its sensitivity is still insufficient for it to replace surgical approaches for axillary staging. PET with PSF reconstruction could be used to perform sentinel node biopsy more safely in patients with a primary tumour ≤30 mm and with unremarkable PET results in the axilla.
点扩散函数(PSF)重建可提高正电子发射断层扫描(PET)系统整个视野范围内的空间分辨率,与有序子集期望最大化(OSEM)等传统算法相比,能检测到更小的转移灶。我们评估了PSF重建对乳腺癌患者腋窝分期定量值和诊断准确性的影响,并与OSEM重建进行比较,重点关注淋巴结转移灶的大小。
这是一项在单一转诊中心开展的前瞻性研究,50例患者在腋窝淋巴结清扫术前接受了(18)F - 氟代脱氧葡萄糖(FDG)PET检查。PET数据采用OSEM算法和PSF重建进行重建,由病理学家进行盲法分析和验证,病理学家测量每个腋窝最大的淋巴结转移灶。该大小用于评估PET诊断性能。
病理检查显示,34例患者(68%)有淋巴结受累。总体而言,每个腋窝最大淋巴结转移灶的中位数大小为7毫米(范围0.5 - 40毫米)。PSF重建检测到的受累淋巴结比OSEM重建更多(p = 0.003)。PSF与OSEM的最大标准摄取值(SUVmax)平均比值为1.66(95%可信区间1.01 - 2.32)。最大淋巴结转移灶>7毫米的患者中,PSF和OSEM重建的敏感性分别为96%和92%;最大淋巴结转移灶≤7毫米的患者中,敏感性分别为60%和40%;原发肿瘤≤30毫米的患者中,敏感性分别为92%和69%。Biggerstaff图形比较显示,总体上PSF重建优于OSEM重建。PSF和OSEM重建均未检测到、PSF检测到但OSEM未检测到以及两者均检测到的淋巴结受累患者中,最大淋巴结转移灶的中位数大小分别为3毫米、6毫米和16毫米(p = 0.0064)。在PSF重建检测到但OSEM重建未检测到的淋巴结受累患者中,最小可检测到的转移灶为1.8毫米。
由于更好的活性恢复,采用PSF重建的PET在检测≤7毫米的淋巴结转移方面比采用OSEM重建的PET表现更好。然而,其敏感性仍不足以取代腋窝分期的手术方法。对于原发肿瘤≤30毫米且腋窝PET结果不明显的患者,采用PSF重建的PET可更安全地用于前哨淋巴结活检。