Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 223-239 , May 2007

Novel Quantitative Techniques for Assessing Regional and Global Function and Structure Based on Modern Imaging Modalities: Implications for Normal Variation, Aging and Diseased States

  • Sandip Basu, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • ,
  • Habib Zaidi, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Nuclear Medicine, Geneva University Hospital, Geneva, Switzerland.
    • ,
  • Mohamed Houseni, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • ,
  • Gonca Bural, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • ,
  • Jay Udupa, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • ,
  • Paul Acton, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Molecular Imaging, Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical R&D, Spring House, PA.
    • ,
  • Drew A. Torigian, MD, MA

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • ,
  • Abass Alavi, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Abass Alavi, MD, Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce Street, 1 Donner Building, Philadelphia, PA 19104-4283.

References 

  1. Alavi A, Reivich M, Greenberg J, et al. Mapping of functional activity in brain with 18F-fluoro-deoxyglucose. Semin Nucl Med. 1981;11:24–31
  2. Reivich M, Alavi A, Wolf A, et al. Use of 2-deoxy-D[1-11C]glucose for the determination of local cerebral glucose metabolism in humans: Variation within and between subjects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1982;2:307–319
  3. In:  Zaidi H editors. Quantitative Analysis in Nuclear Medicine Imaging. New York: Springer; 2006;
  4. Carson R. Tracer kinetic modeling in PET. In:  Valk PE,  Bailey DL,  Townsend DW, et al. editor. Positron Emission Tomography: Basic Science and Clinical Practice. Chapter 4 ed. London: Springer-Verlag; 2003;p. 147–179
  5. Sokoloff L, Reivich M, Kennedy C, et al. The [14C]deoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization: Theory, procedure, and normal values in the conscious and anesthetized albino rat. J Neurochem. 1977;28:897–916
  6. Reivich M, Kuhl D, Wolf A, et al. The [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization in man. Circ Res. 1979;44:127–137
  7. Phelps ME, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, et al. Tomographic measurement of local cerebral glucose metabolic rate in humans with (F-18)2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Validation of method. Ann Neurol. 1979;6:371–388
  8. Gjedde A. Calculation of cerebral glucose phosphorylation from brain uptake of glucose analogs in vivo: A re-examination. Brain Res Rev. 1982;4:237–274
  9. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;3:1–7
  10. Huang S-C. Anatomy of SUV. Nucl Med Biol. 2000;27:643–646
  11. Minn H, Leskinen-Kallio S, Lindholm P, et al. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in tumors: Kinetic vs. steady-state methods with reference to plasma insulin. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1993;17:115–123
  12. Kole A, Nieweg O, Pruim J, et al. Standardized uptake value and quantification of metabolism for breast cancer imagin with FDG and L-[1-11C]tyrosine PET. J Nuc Med. 1997;38:692–696
  13. Keyes J. SUV: Standard uptake value or silly useless value?. J Nucl Med. 1995;36:1836–1839
  14. Kim CK, Gupta N, Chandramouli B, et al. Stardized uptake values of FDG: Body surface area correction is preferable to body weight correction. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:164–167
  15. Kim CK, Gupta N. Dependency of standardized uptake values of fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose on body size: Comparison of body surface area correction and lean body mass correction. Nucl Med Commun. 1996;17:890–894
  16. Gupta N, Frank A, Dewan N, et al. Solitary pulmonary nodules: Detection of malignancy with PET with 2-[F-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose. Radiology. 1992;184:441–444
  17. Zasadny KR, Wahl RL. Standardized uptake values of normal tissues at PET with 2-[fluorine-18]-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose: Variations with body weight and a method for correction. Radiology. 1993;189:847–850
  18. Avril N, Bense S, Ziegler SI, et al. Breast imaging with fluorine-18-FDG PET: Quantitative image analysis. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1186–1191
  19. Zhuang HM, Cortes-Blanco A, Pourdehnad M, et al. Do high glucose levels have differential effect on FDG uptake in inflammatory and malignant disorders?. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:1123–1128
  20. Hamberg LM, Hunter GJ, Alpert NM, et al. The dose uptake ratio as an index of glucose metabolism: Useful parameter or oversimplification?. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:1308–1312
  21. Kung JW, Yu JQ, Evans T, et al. FDG uptake at extended time periods in non small cell cancer—Implications for improved cancer management. J Nucl Med. 2004;19–23Proceedings of 51st Annual Meeting of Society of Nuclear Medicine
  22. Hustinx R, Smith RJ, Benard F, et al. Dual time point fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography: A potential method to differentiate malignancy from inflammation and normal tissue in the head and neck. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:1345–1348
  23. Matthies A, Hickeson M, Cuchiara A, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:871–875
  24. Boerner AR, Weckesser M, Herzog H, et al. Optimal scan time for fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:226–230
  25. Kumar R, Loving VA, Chauhan A, et al. Potential of dual-time-point imaging to improve breast cancer diagnosis with 18F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1819–1824
  26. Mavi A, Urhan M, Yu JQ, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging detects breast cancer with high sensitivity and correlates well with histologic subtypes. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1440–1446
  27. Nishiyama Y, Yamamoto Y, Fukunaga K, et al. Dual-time-point 18F-FDG PET for the evaluation of gallbladder carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:633–638
  28. Ma SY, See LC, Lai CH, et al. Delayed (18)F-FDG PET for detection of paraaortic lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:1775-1183
  29. Spence AM, Muzi M, Mankoff DA, et al. 18F-FDG PET of gliomas at delayed intervals: Improved distinction between tumor and normal gray matter. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:1653–1659
  30. Zhuang H, Pourdehnad M, Lambright ES, et al. Dual time point 18F-FDG PET imaging for differentiating malignant from inflammatory processes. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1412–1417
  31. Houseni M, Chamroonrat W, Bural G, et al. Promising role of dual time FDG-PET imaging in assessing focal and diffuse bone marrow disorders. J NUCL Med. 2006;47:227P
  32. Chawluk J, Alavi A, et al. Positron emission tomography in aging and dementia: Effect of cerebral atrophy. R D J Nucl Med. 1987;28:431–437
  33. Tanna NK, Kohn MI, Horwich DN, et al. Analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid volumes with MR imaging: Impact on PET data correction for atrophy (Part II: Aging and Alzheimer dementia). Radiology. 1991;178:123–130
  34. Rousset OG, Ma Y, Evans AC. Correction for partial volume effects in PET: Principle and validation. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:904–911
  35. Aston JA, Cunningham VJ, Asselin MC, et al. Positron emission tomography partial volume correction: estimation and algorithms. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22:1019–1034
  36. Quarantelli M, Berkouk K, Prinster A, et al. Integrated software for the analysis of brain PET/SPECT studies with partial-volume-effect correction. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:192–201
  37. Baete K, Nuyts J, Laere KV, et al. Evaluation of anatomy based reconstruction for partial volume correction in brain FDG-PET. NeuroImage. 2004;23:305–317
  38. Giovacchini G, Toczek MT, Bonwetsch R, et al. 5-HT1A receptors are reduced in temporal lobe epilepsy after partial-volume correction. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1128–1135
  39. Zaidi H, Ruest T, Schoenahl F, et al. Comparative evaluation of statistical brain MR image segmentation algorithms and their impact on partial volume effect correction in PET. Neuroimage. 2006;32:1591–1607
  40. Weber W, Young C, Abdel-Dayem HM, et al. Assessment of pulmonary lesions with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron imaging using coincidence mode gamma cameras. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:574–578
  41. Hickeson M, Yun M, Matthies A, et al. Use of a corrected standardized uptake value based on the lesion size on CT permits accurate characterization of lung nodules on FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002;29:1639–1647
  42. Lubberink M, Tolmachev V, Widstrom C, et al. 110mIn-DTPA-D-Phe1-octreotide for imaging of neuroendocrine tumors with PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1391–1397
  43. Muller-Gartner HW, Links JM, Prince JL, et al. Measurement of radiotracer concentration in brain gray matter using positron emission tomography: MRI-based correction for partial volume effects. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1992;12:571–583
  44. Meltzer CC, Zubieta JK, Links JM, et al. MR-based correction of brain PET measurements for heterogeneous gray matter radioactivity distribution. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1996;16:650–658
  45. Kohn MI, Tanna NK, Herman GT, et al. Analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid volumes with MR imaging (Part I. Methods, reliability, and validation). Radiology. 1991;178:115–122
  46. Zhuge Y, Liu J, Udupa JK. Membership-based multiprotocol MR brain image segmentation. In:  Sonka M,  Fitzpatrick JM editor. Medical Imaging 2003: Image Processing. Vol 5032:San Diego, CA: SPIE; 2003;p. 1572–1579
  47. Bural G, Zhuge Y, Torigian D, et al. Partial volume correction and segmentation allows accurate measurement of SUV for the grey matter in the brain. J NUCL Med. 2006;47:9P
  48. Zaidi H. Medical image segmentation: Quo Vadis. Comput Meth Prog Biomed. 2006;84:63–67
  49. Bezdek JC, Hall LO, Clarke LP. Review of MR image segmentation techniques using pattern recognition. Med Phys. 1993;20:1033–1048
  50. Duncan JS, Ayache N. Medical image analysis: Progress over two decades and the challenges ahead. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Mach Intell. 2000;22:85–106
  51. Olabarriaga SD, Smeulders AW. Interaction in the segmentation of medical images: A survey. Med Image Anal. 2001;5:127–142
  52. Montgomery DWG, Amira A, Zaidi H. Fully automated segmentation of oncological PET volumes using a combined multiscale and statistical model. Med Phys. 2007;34:722–736
  53. Behloul F, Lelieveldt BP, Boudraa A, et al. Neuro-fuzzy systems for computer-aided myocardial viability assessment. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;20:1302–1313
  54. Wong K-P, Dagan F, Meikle SR, et al. Segmentation of dynamic PET images using cluster analysis. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2002;49:200–207
  55. Boudraa A, Cexus J-C, Zaidi H. Functional segmentation of dynamic nuclear medicine images by cross-PsiB energy operator. Comput Meth Prog Biomed. 2006;84:148–154
  56. Zaidi H, Hasegawa BH. Determination of the attenuation map in emission tomography. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:291–315
  57. Zaidi H, Xu XG. Computational anthropomorphic models of the human anatomy: The path to realistic Monte Carlo modeling in radiological sciences. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2007;Feb 13 [Epub ahead of print]
  58. Udupa JK, Odhner D, Samarasekera S, et al. 3DVIEWNIX: an open, transportable, multidimensional, multimodality, multiparametric imaging software system. In:  Kim Y editors. Medical Imaging 1994: Image Capture, Formatting, and Display. Vol 2164:Newport Beach, CA: SPIE; 1994;p. 58–73
  59. Paulino AC, Thorstad WL, Fox T. Role of fusion in radiotherapy treatment planning. Semin Nucl Med. 2003;33:238–243
  60. Thireou T, Kontaxakis G, Strauss LG, et al. Feasibility study of the use of similarity maps in the evaluation of oncological dynamic positron emission tomography images. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2005;43:23–32
  61. Frouin V, Comtat C, Reilhac A, et al. Correction of partial volume effect for PET striatal imaging: fast implementation and study of robustness. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1715–1726
  62. Zaidi H, Montandon M-L, Slosman DO. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided attenuation and scatter corrections in three-dimensional brain positron emission tomography. Med Phys. 2003;30:937–948
  63. Alavi A, Newberg AB, Souder E, et al. Quantitative analysis of PET and MRI data in normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease: Atrophy weighted total brain metabolism and absolute whole brain metabolism as reliable discriminators. J Nucl Med. 1993;34:1681–1687
  64. Bural GG, Torigian DA, Chamroonrat W, et al. Quantitative assessment of the atherosclerotic burden of the aorta by combined FDG-PET and CT image analysis: A new concept. Nucl Med Biol. 2006;33:1037–1043
  65. Larson SM, Erdi Y, Akhurst T, et al. Tumor treatment response based on visual and quantitative changes in global tumor glycolysis using PET-FDG imaging (The visual response score and the change in total lesion glycolysis). Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:159–171

PII: S0001-2998(07)00021-9

doi: 10.1053/j.semnuclmed.2007.01.005

Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 37, Issue 3 , Pages 223-239 , May 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution