THE PHANTOM STUDY OF SPATIAL REGISTRATION IN PET/CT
Keywords:
PET/CT, F18, phantom, registrationAbstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the spatial registration in terms of the registration difference in PET/CT with the phantom.
Method: Three experiments were performed by using the phantom insert with hollow spheres filled with F-18 and the combined PET/CT system (Siemens, Biograph), including the same offset correction (test 1,2,3) and varied offset correction for the gantry (offset 1,2,3), and the clinical setting. The location of the center of was used for statistical analysis of the location difference. A p-value less than 0.05 was defined to be statistically significant. The acceptable value for the registration difference in the registered image was taken as 1 mm or less.
Result: The mean registration difference in the study of same offset correction for the gantry was 0.68±0.24 mm. The p-values obtained in the first experiment were more than 0.05. There was no statistically significant difference between each test. The average registration difference in the study of varied offset correction for the gantry was 0.51±0.17 mm. There was a statistically significant difference when the difference in the z-axis was more than 0.05 mm. The average registration difference in the clinical setting was 0.50±0.28 mm. There was no statistical significance between the clinical setting and the phantom setting.(p-value = 0.764)
Conclusion: Inthis PET/CT system, the spatial registration was sufficiently accurate in the phantom study and the spatial registration difference in the registered image was less than Imm.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Vogel WV, Oyen WJG, Barentsz JO, KaandersJ H.A.M., Corstens FH.M. PET/ CT: Panacea,Redundancy, or Something in Between? J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 15s-24s
Goerres GW, Kamel E, Heidelberg TNH, Schwitter MR, Burger C, Schulthess GK. PET-CT image co-registration in the thorax: influence of respiration. Eur J Nucl Med 2002; 29: 351-360
Goerres GW, Kamel E, Seifert B, et al. Accuracy of image coregistration of pulmonary lesions in patients with non-small cell lung cancer using an integrated PET/CT system. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1469-1475
Osman M, Cohade C, Nakamoto Y, Marshall LT, Leal JP, Wahl RL. Clinical significant inaccurate localization of lesions with PET CT: frequency in 300 patients. J Nucl Med 2003; 44: 240-243
Beyer T, Antoch G, Blodgett T, Freudenberg LF, Akhurst T, Mueller S. Dual-modality PET/CT imaging: the effect of respiratory motion on combined image quality in clinical oncology. EurJ Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 588-596
Nakamoto Y, Tatsumi M, Cohade C Osman M, Marshall LT, Wahl RL. Accuracy of image fusion of normal abdominal organs visualized with PET/CT. EurJ Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003; 30: 597-602
Cohade C, Osman M, Marshall LT, Wahl RL. PET-CT: accuracy of PET and CT spatial registration of lung lesions. EurJ Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2003;30:72 1-726
NEMA. NEMA standards publication NU 2 -2001. Performance measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2001: 30
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 The ASEAN Journal of Radiology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Disclosure Forms and Copyright Agreements
All authors listed on the manuscript must complete both the electronic copyright agreement. (in the case of acceptance)
