%0 Journal Article
%T Effects of rigid and non-rigid image registration on test-retest variability of quantitative [18F]FDG PET/CT studies
%A Floris HP van Velden
%A Paul van Beers
%A Johan Nuyts
%A Linda M Velasquez
%A Wendy Hayes
%A Adriaan A Lammertsma
%A Ronald Boellaard
%A Dirk Loeckx
%J EJNMMI Research
%D 2012
%I Springer
%R 10.1186/2191-219x-2-10
%X Test-retest whole-body [18F]FDG PET/CT scans were collected retrospectively for 11 subjects with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies (colorectal carcinoma). Rigid and non-rigid image registration techniques with various degrees of locality were applied to PET, CT, and non-attenuation corrected PET (NAC) data. VOI were drawn independently on both test and retest scans. VOI drawn on test scans were projected onto retest scans and the overlap between projected VOI and manually drawn retest VOI was quantified using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). In addition, absolute (unsigned) differences in TRT of SUVmax, SUVmean, metabolic volume and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were calculated in on one hand the test VOI and on the other hand the retest VOI and projected VOI. Reference values were obtained by delineating VOIs on both scans separately.Non-rigid PET registration showed the best performance (median DSC: 0.82, other methods: 0.71-0.81). Compared with the reference, none of the registration types showed significant absolute differences in TRT of SUVmax, SUVmean and TLG (p > 0.05). Only for absolute TRT of metabolic volume, significant lower values (p < 0.05) were observed for all registration strategies when compared to delineating VOIs separately, except for non-rigid PET registrations (p = 0.1). Non-rigid PET registration provided good volume TRT (7.7%) that was smaller than the reference (16%).In particular, non-rigid PET image registration showed good performance similar to delineating VOI on both scans separately, and with smaller TRT in metabolic volume estimates.Positron emission tomography (PET) has now been accepted as a valuable tool in oncology, not only for detecting or staging disease and estimating target volumes for radiotherapy purposes, but also for monitoring response to therapy and predicting prognosis [1,2]. To date, [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose ([18F]FDG) is the most widely used tracer for oncological applications. Especially for monitor
%K Positron emission tomography (PET)
%K Test-retest variability
%K Image registration
%K Non-rigid
%K Rigid
%U http://www.ejnmmires.com/content/2/1/10