Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
  Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size Users Online: 392  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 21-26

Comparison of standardized uptake value ratio calculations in amyloid positron emission tomography brain imaging


1 Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA
2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
3 PMOD Technologies LLC, Zurich, Switzerland

Correspondence Address:
Karin Knesaurek
Division of Nuclear Medicine, Box 1141, One Gustave L. Levy Place, New York, NY 10029
USA
Login to access the Email id


DOI: 10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_5_17

PMID: 29398961

Rights and Permissions

Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) imaging with florbetapir 18F (18F-AV-45) allows in vivo assessment of cerebral amyloid load and can be used in the evaluation of progression of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other dementias associated with b-amyloid. However, cortical amyloid deposition can occur in healthy cases, as well as in patients with AD and quantification of cortical amyloid burden can improve the 18F-AV-45 PET imaging evaluations. The quantification is mostly performed by cortical-to-cerebellum standardized uptake value ratio (SUVr). The aim of our study was to compare two methods for SUVr calculations in amyloid florbetapir 18F PET brain imaging. In amyloid florbetapir 18F PET brain imaging study, we imaged 42 cases with the mean age of 72.6 ± 9.9 (mean ± standard deviation). They were imaged on different PET/computed tomography systems with 369.0 ± 34.2 kBq of 18F florbetapir. Data were reconstructed using the vendor's reconstruction software. Corresponding magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data were retrieved, and matched PET and MRI data were transferred to a common platform. Two methods were used for the calculation of the ratio of cortical-to-cerebellar signal (SUVr). One method was based on the MIM Software Inc., Version 6.4 software and only uses PET data. The second approach used the PMOD Neuro tool (version 3.5). This approach utilizes PET and corresponding MRI data (preferably T1-weighted) for better brain segmentation. For all the 42 cases, the average SUVr values for MIM and PMOD applications were 1.24 ± 0.26 and 1.22 ± 0.25, respectively, with a mean difference of 0.02 ± 0.15. The repeatability coefficient was 0.15 (12.3% of the mean). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was very high, r = 0.96. For amyloid-negative cases, the average SUVr values were lower than all group SUVr average values, 0.96 ± 0.07 and 1.00 ± 0.09, for MIM and PMOD applications, respectively. A mean difference was 0.04 ± 0.12, the repeatability coefficient was 0.12 (12.9% of the mean) and the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was modest, r = 0.55. For amyloid-positive patients, the average SUVr values were higher than the same all grouP values, 1.34 ± 0.16 and 1.35 ± 0.20, respectively, with a mean difference of 0.01 ± 0.16. The repeatability coefficient was 0.16 (11.9% of the mean). The Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was high, r = 0.93. Our results indicated that the SUVr values derived using MIM and PMOD Neuro are effectively interchangeable and well correlated. However, PET template-based quantification (MIM approach) is clinically friendlier and easier to use. MRI template-based quantification (PMOD Neuro) better delineates different regions of the brain, can be used with any tracer, and therefore is more suitable for research.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed702    
    Printed22    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded154    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal