Cargando…
Influence of patient motion on quantitative accuracy in cardiac (15)O-water positron emission tomography
BACKGROUND: Patient motion is a common problem during cardiac PET. The purpose of the present study was to investigate to what extent motions influence the quantitative accuracy of cardiac (15)O-water PET/CT and to develop a method for automated motion detection. METHOD: Frequency and magnitude of m...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer International Publishing
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9345798/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33655448 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12350-021-02550-9 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Patient motion is a common problem during cardiac PET. The purpose of the present study was to investigate to what extent motions influence the quantitative accuracy of cardiac (15)O-water PET/CT and to develop a method for automated motion detection. METHOD: Frequency and magnitude of motion was assessed visually using data from 50 clinical (15)O-water PET/CT scans. Simulations of 4 types of motions with amplitude of 5 to 20 mm were performed based on data from 10 scans. An automated motion detection algorithm was evaluated on clinical and simulated motion data. MBF and PTF of all simulated scans were compared to the original scan used as reference. RESULTS: Patient motion was detected in 68% of clinical cases by visual inspection. All observed motions were small with amplitudes less than half the LV wall thickness. A clear pattern of motion influence was seen in the simulations with a decrease of myocardial blood flow (MBF) in the region of myocardium to where the motion was directed. The perfusable tissue fraction (PTF) trended in the opposite direction. Global absolute average deviation of MBF was 3.1% ± 1.8% and 7.3% ± 6.3% for motions with maximum amplitudes of 5 and 20 mm, respectively. Automated motion detection showed a sensitivity of 90% for simulated motions ≥ 10 mm but struggled with the smaller (≤ 5 mm) simulated (sensitivity 45%) and clinical motions (accuracy 48%). CONCLUSION: Patient motion can impair the quantitative accuracy of MBF. However, at typically occurring levels of patient motion, effects are similar to or only slightly larger than inter-observer variability, and downstream clinical effects are likely negligible. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version of this article (10.1007/s12350-021-02550-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
---|