Estimation of liver standardized uptake value in F18-FDG PET/CT scanning: impact of different malignancies, blood glucose level, body weight normalization, and imaging systems.
Mohamed S Abd-Elkader, Sherif M Elmaghraby, Mohamed A Abdel-Mohsen, Magdy M Khalil
{"title":"Estimation of liver standardized uptake value in F18-FDG PET/CT scanning: impact of different malignancies, blood glucose level, body weight normalization, and imaging systems.","authors":"Mohamed S Abd-Elkader, Sherif M Elmaghraby, Mohamed A Abdel-Mohsen, Magdy M Khalil","doi":"10.1007/s12149-024-01985-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this work was to investigate homogeneity and stability of liver SUV in terms of different malignancies considering different body normalization schemes and blood glucose concentrations as well as PET/CT imaging systems.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study included 207 patients with four different types of cancers namely breast, lymphoma, lung, and bone-metastasis. Data acquisition was performed with GE Discovery IQ, Biograph mCT, uMI 550, and Ingenuity TF64 after a single intravenous injection of 194 ± 67.5 MBq of 18F-FDG.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In body weight normalization, SUVmax and SUVmean in bone-mets as well as SUVmean in lung patients were not statistically different among scanners especially for data corrected for glucose levels (p = 0.062, 0.121, and 0.150, respectively). In SUVlbm derived from lung patients, there was no significant differences in Philips in comparison to GE and Siemens (both, p > 0.05) for data corrected and not corrected for glucose levels. In SUVbsa, the only non-significant difference revealed among scanners was in the measurements of SUVmean obtained from lung and bone-mets (p = 0.107 and 0.114) both corrected for glucose levels. In SUVbmi, SUVmean of lung and bone-mets as well as SUVmax of bone-mets showed a non-significant differences among the four different scanning systems (p = 0.303, 0.091, and 0.222, respectively) for data corrected for glucose levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Liver glucose correction needs further investigations in individual tumors but could be potentially affected by whether measurements are made on SUVmean versus SUVmax, body weight normalization, as well as the imaging system. As such, selection of normalization to body weight method should be carefully selected before clinical adoption and clinically adopted and body surface area would provide the highest correlation. As such, normalization of body weight should be carefully made before clinical adoption. SUVmean proves to be useful and stable metric when liver is corrected for blood glucose levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":8007,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Nuclear Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Nuclear Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-024-01985-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this work was to investigate homogeneity and stability of liver SUV in terms of different malignancies considering different body normalization schemes and blood glucose concentrations as well as PET/CT imaging systems.
Methods: The study included 207 patients with four different types of cancers namely breast, lymphoma, lung, and bone-metastasis. Data acquisition was performed with GE Discovery IQ, Biograph mCT, uMI 550, and Ingenuity TF64 after a single intravenous injection of 194 ± 67.5 MBq of 18F-FDG.
Results: In body weight normalization, SUVmax and SUVmean in bone-mets as well as SUVmean in lung patients were not statistically different among scanners especially for data corrected for glucose levels (p = 0.062, 0.121, and 0.150, respectively). In SUVlbm derived from lung patients, there was no significant differences in Philips in comparison to GE and Siemens (both, p > 0.05) for data corrected and not corrected for glucose levels. In SUVbsa, the only non-significant difference revealed among scanners was in the measurements of SUVmean obtained from lung and bone-mets (p = 0.107 and 0.114) both corrected for glucose levels. In SUVbmi, SUVmean of lung and bone-mets as well as SUVmax of bone-mets showed a non-significant differences among the four different scanning systems (p = 0.303, 0.091, and 0.222, respectively) for data corrected for glucose levels.
Conclusion: Liver glucose correction needs further investigations in individual tumors but could be potentially affected by whether measurements are made on SUVmean versus SUVmax, body weight normalization, as well as the imaging system. As such, selection of normalization to body weight method should be carefully selected before clinical adoption and clinically adopted and body surface area would provide the highest correlation. As such, normalization of body weight should be carefully made before clinical adoption. SUVmean proves to be useful and stable metric when liver is corrected for blood glucose levels.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine is an official journal of the Japanese Society of Nuclear Medicine. It develops the appropriate application of radioactive substances and stable nuclides in the field of medicine.
The journal promotes the exchange of ideas and information and research in nuclear medicine and includes the medical application of radionuclides and related subjects. It presents original articles, short communications, reviews and letters to the editor.