IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0296357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of improved dead time correction on the quantification accuracy of a dedicated BrainPET scanner

Author

Listed:
  • Ahlam Said Mohamad Issa
  • Jürgen Scheins
  • Lutz Tellmann
  • Cláudia Régio Brambilla
  • Philipp Lohmann
  • Elena Rota-Kops
  • Hans Herzog
  • Irene Neuner
  • N Jon Shah
  • Christoph Lerche

Abstract

Objective: Quantitative values derived from PET brain images are of high interest for neuroscientific applications. Insufficient DT correction (DTC) can lead to a systematic bias of the output parameters obtained by a detailed analysis of the time activity curves (TACs). The DTC method currently used for the Siemens 3T MR BrainPET insert is global, i.e., differences in DT losses between detector blocks are not considered, leading to inaccurate DTC and, consequently, to inaccurate measurements masked by a bias. However, following careful evaluation with phantom measurements, a new block-pairwise DTC method has demonstrated a higher degree of accuracy compared to the global DTC method. Approach: Differences between the global and the block-pairwise DTC method were studied in this work by applying several radioactive tracers. We evaluated the impact on [11C]ABP688, O-(2-[18F]fluoroethyl)-L-tyrosine (FET), and [15O]H2O TACs. Results: For [11C]ABP688, a relevant bias of between -0.0034 and -0.0053 ml/ (cm3 • min) was found in all studied brain regions for the volume of distribution (VT) when using the current global DTC method. For [18F]FET-PET, differences of up to 10% were observed in the tumor-to-brain ratio (TBRmax), these differences depend on the radial distance of the maximum from the PET isocenter. For [15O]H2O, differences between +4% and -7% were observed in the GM region. Average biases of -4.58%, -3.2%, and -1.2% for the regional cerebral blood flow (CBF (K1)), the rate constant k2, and the volume of distribution VT were observed, respectively. Conversely, in the white matter region, average biases of -4.9%, -7.0%, and 3.8% were observed for CBF (K1), k2, and VT, respectively. Conclusion: The bias introduced by the global DTC method leads to an overestimation in the studied quantitative parameters for all applications compared to the block-pairwise method. Significance: The observed differences between the two DTC methods are particularly relevant for research applications in neuroscientific studies as they affect the accuracy of quantitative Brain PET images.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahlam Said Mohamad Issa & Jürgen Scheins & Lutz Tellmann & Cláudia Régio Brambilla & Philipp Lohmann & Elena Rota-Kops & Hans Herzog & Irene Neuner & N Jon Shah & Christoph Lerche, 2024. "Impact of improved dead time correction on the quantification accuracy of a dedicated BrainPET scanner," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-23, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296357
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296357
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0296357&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0296357?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0296357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.