Evaluation of a respiratory motion-corrected image reconstruction algorithm in 2-[F]FDG and [Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC PET/CT: impacts on image quality and tumor quantification.

BACKGROUND

Respiratory motions may cause artifacts on positron emission tomography (PET) images that degrade image quality and quantification accuracy. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of a respiratory motion-corrected image reconstruction (MCIR) algorithm on image quality and tumor quantification compared with nongated/nonmotion-corrected reconstruction.

METHODS

We used a phantom consisting of 5 motion spheres immersed in a chamber driven by a motor. The spheres and the background chamber were filled with 18F solution at a sphere-to-background ratio of 5:1. We enrolled 42 and 16 patients undergoing 2-deoxy-2-[F]fluoro-D-glucose {2-[F]FDG} and Ga-labeled [1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid]-1-Nal3-octreotide {[Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC} PET/computed tomography (CT) from whom 74 and 30 lesions were segmented, respectively. Three reconstructions were performed: data-driven gating-based motion correction (DDGMC), external vital signal module-based motion correction (VSMMC), and noncorrection reconstruction. The standardized uptake values (SUVs) and the volume of the spheres and the lesions were measured and compared among the 3 reconstruction groups. The image noise in the liver was measured, and the visual image quality of motion artifacts was scored by radiologists in the patient study.

RESULTS

In the phantom study, the spheres' SUVs increased by 26-36%, and the volumes decreased by 35-38% in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with the noncorrection group. In the 2-[F]FDG PET patient study, the lesions' SUVs had a median increase of 10.87-12.65% while the volumes had a median decrease of 14.88-15.18% in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with those of noncorrection. In the [Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC PET patient study, the lesions' SUVs increased by 14.23-15.45%, and the volumes decreased by 19.11-20.94% in DDGMC and VSMMC. The image noise in the liver was equal between the DDGMC, VSMMC, and noncorrection groups. Radiologists found improved image quality in more than 45% of the cases in DDGMC and VSMMC compared with the noncorrection group. There was no statistically significant difference in SUVs, volumes, or visual image quality scores between DDGMC and VSMMC.

CONCLUSIONS

MCIR improves tumor quantification accuracy and visual image quality by reducing respiratory motion artifacts without compromised image noise performance or elongated acquisition time in 2-[F]FDG and [Ga]Ga-DOTA-NOC PET/CT tumor imaging. The performance of DDG-driven MCIR is as good as that of the external device-driven solution.