Agrigoroaie Laurentiu, Anizan Nadege, Garcia Camilo, Balleyguier Corinne, Henry Théophraste
Medical Imaging Departement, Gustave Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France.
Medical Physics Department, Gustave Roussy, 94805, Villejuif, France.
EJNMMI Res. 2025 Feb 14;15(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13550-025-01195-w.
Device-based respiratory gating improves diagnostic and quantification accuracy in positron emission tomography (PET), but requires additional time to setup the device and the failure rate can be significant. Our aim was to internally validate the quantification performance of data-driven respiratory-gated PET imaging against the gold standard, the device-based method, in clinical oncological practice. We retrospectively analysed [18F]FDG PET/CT scans of patients from our centre with at least one measurable [18F]FDG-avid malignant lesion. All PET/CT acquisitions were performed on a Siemens Biograph 64 Vision 600 system with respiratory gating by belt and also by adding the data-driven gating with OncoFreeze AI™. We recorded the SUVmax and SUVpeak for up to a maximum of 5 lesions per patient. We computed the mean absolute bias between the two gating methods and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) at the cohort level and in subgroups.
Of the 692 consecutive patients screened for inclusion, 196 patients were analysed, from whom 536 lesions were measured. The mean absolute biases in the SUVmax and SUVpeak of lesions in the whole cohort were 3.8% (CI 3.4-4.2) and 2.1% (CI 1.9-2.4), respectively. At patient-level, 21% of them had at least one lesion with a SUVmax bias above 10%, while for SUVpeak this proportion was 5%. In the subgroup analysis by PERCIST criteria, only 2% of patients had significant bias in the SUVmax, and 0.5% in SUVpeak. There was no clinically significant effect of lesion size or anatomical site on SUV measurements between the two respiratory gating methods.
Quantitative comparison of data-driven and device-based respiratory-gated PET scans revealed negligible differences, proving that data-driven respiratory gating is a reliable and accurate alternative to the device-based gating method in routine [18F]FDG-PET/CT oncological evaluation.
基于设备的呼吸门控可提高正电子发射断层扫描（PET）的诊断和定量准确性，但需要额外时间来设置设备，且故障率可能较高。我们的目的是在临床肿瘤学实践中，针对金标准（基于设备的方法）对数据驱动的呼吸门控PET成像的定量性能进行内部验证。我们回顾性分析了来自我们中心的患者的[18F]FDG PET/CT扫描，这些患者至少有一个可测量的[18F]FDG摄取阳性恶性病变。所有PET/CT采集均在西门子Biograph 64 Vision 600系统上进行，采用腰带式呼吸门控，并通过OncoFreeze AI™添加数据驱动门控。我们记录了每位患者最多5个病变的SUVmax和SUVpeak。我们计算了两种门控方法之间的平均绝对偏差以及队列水平和亚组中的95%置信区间（CI）。
在筛选纳入的692例连续患者中，分析了196例患者，测量了536个病变。整个队列中病变的SUVmax和SUVpeak的平均绝对偏差分别为3.8%（CI 3.4 - 4.2）和2.1%（CI 1.9 - 2.4）。在患者水平上，21%的患者至少有一个病变的SUVmax偏差超过10%，而对于SUVpeak，这一比例为5%。在根据PERCIST标准进行的亚组分析中，只有2%的患者在SUVmax方面有显著偏差，在SUVpeak方面为0.5%。两种呼吸门控方法之间，病变大小或解剖部位对SUV测量没有临床显著影响。
数据驱动和基于设备的呼吸门控PET扫描的定量比较显示差异可忽略不计，证明在常规[18F]FDG - PET/CT肿瘤学评估中，数据驱动的呼吸门控是基于设备的门控方法的可靠且准确的替代方法。
