Significance of the impact of motion compensation on the variability of PET image features.

In lung cancer, quantification by positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging presents challenges due to respiratory movement. Our primary aim was to study the impact of motion compensation implied by retrospectively gated (4D)-PET/CT on the variability of PET quantitative parameters. Its significance was evaluated by comparison with the variability due to (i) the voxel size in image reconstruction and (ii) the voxel size in image post-resampling. The method employed for feature extraction was chosen based on the analysis of (i) the effect of discretization of the standardized uptake value (SUV) on complementarity between texture features (TF) and conventional indices, (ii) the impact of the segmentation method on the variability of image features, and (iii) the variability of image features across the time-frame of 4D-PET. Thirty-one PET-features were involved. Three SUV discretization methods were applied: a constant width (SUV resolution) of the resampling bin (method RW), a constant number of bins (method RN) and RN on the image obtained after histogram equalization (method EqRN). The segmentation approaches evaluated were 40[Formula: see text] of SUV and the contrast oriented algorithm (COA). Parameters derived from 4D-PET images were compared with values derived from the PET image obtained for (i) the static protocol used in our clinical routine (3D) and (ii) the 3D image post-resampled to the voxel size of the 4D image and PET image derived after modifying the reconstruction of the 3D image to comprise the voxel size of the 4D image. Results showed that TF complementarity with conventional indices was sensitive to the SUV discretization method. In the comparison of COA and 40[Formula: see text] contours, despite the values not being interchangeable, all image features showed strong linear correlations (r  >  0.91, [Formula: see text]). Across the time-frames of 4D-PET, all image features followed a normal distribution in most patients. For our patient cohort, the compensation of tumor motion did not have a significant impact on the quantitative PET parameters. The variability of PET parameters due to voxel size in image reconstruction was more significant than variability due to voxel size in image post-resampling. In conclusion, most of the parameters (apart from the contrast of neighborhood matrix) were robust to the motion compensation implied by 4D-PET/CT. The impact on parameter variability due to the voxel size in image reconstruction and in image post-resampling could not be assumed to be equivalent.