Increased
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 01 2020
15 01 2020
Historique:
received:
26
08
2019
accepted:
16
12
2019
entrez:
17
1
2020
pubmed:
17
1
2020
medline:
18
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
On conventional PET/CT, and under physiological conditions, the volume of the pituitary gland (PG) is small, and its metabolic activity is commonly comparable to the surrounding background level in
Identifiants
pubmed: 31942032
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-57313-x
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-57313-x
pmc: PMC6962205
doi:
Substances chimiques
Fluorodeoxyglucose F18
0Z5B2CJX4D
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
368Références
Jeong, S. Y. et al. Incidental pituitary uptake on whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT: a multicentre study. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 37, 2334–2343 (2010).
doi: 10.1007/s00259-010-1571-5
Hyun, S. H., Choi, J. Y., Lee, K.-H., Choe, Y. S. & Kim, B.-T. Incidental focal 18F-FDG uptake in the pituitary gland: clinical significance and differential diagnostic criteria. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med. 52, 547–550 (2011).
Komori, T., Martin, W. H., Graber, A. L. & Delbeke, D. Serendipitous detection of Cushing’s disease by FDG positron emission tomography and a review of the literature. Clin. Nucl. Med. 27, 176–178 (2002).
doi: 10.1097/00003072-200203000-00005
Campeau, R. J., David, O. & Dowling, A. M. Pituitary adenoma detected on FDG positron emission tomography in a patient with mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma. Clin. Nucl. Med. 28, 296–298 (2003).
pubmed: 12642707
Koo, C. W. et al. Incidental detection of clinically occult pituitary adenoma on whole-body FDG PET imaging. Clin. Nucl. Med. 31, 42–43 (2006).
doi: 10.1097/01.rlu.0000191779.75532.05
Soret, M., Bacharach, S. L. & Buvat, I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med. 48, 932–945 (2007).
Hofheinz, F. et al. A method for model-free partial volume correction in oncological PET. EJNMMI Res. 2, 16 (2012).
doi: 10.1186/2191-219X-2-16
Rousset, O., Rahmim, A., Alavi, A. & Zaidi, H. Partial Volume Correction Strategies in PET. PET Clin. 2, 235–249 (2007).
doi: 10.1016/j.cpet.2007.10.005
Wagatsuma, K. et al. Comparison between new-generation SiPM-based and conventional PMT-based TOF-PET/CT. Phys. Medica PM Int. J. Devoted Appl. Phys. Med. Biol. Off. J. Ital. Assoc. Biomed. Phys. AIFB 42, 203–210 (2017).
Sonni, I. et al. Initial experience with a SiPM-based PET/CT scanner: influence of acquisition time on image quality. EJNMMI Phys. 5, 9 (2018).
doi: 10.1186/s40658-018-0207-x
van Sluis, J. J. et al. Performance characteristics of the digital Biograph Vision PET/CT system. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med., https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.215418 (2019).
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.118.215418
Bettinardi, V. et al. Physical performance of the new hybrid PET∕CT Discovery-690. Med. Phys. 38, 5394–5411 (2011).
doi: 10.1118/1.3635220
van der Vos, C. S. et al. Quantification, improvement, and harmonization of small lesion detection with state-of-the-art PET. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 44, 4–16 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3727-z
Aide, N. et al. EANM/EARL harmonization strategies in PET quantification: from daily practice to multicentre oncological studies. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 44, 17–31 (2017).
doi: 10.1007/s00259-017-3740-2
Zhang, J., Maniawski, P. & Knopp, M. V. Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET/CT system. EJNMMI Res. 8, 97 (2018).
doi: 10.1186/s13550-018-0448-7
Conti, M. & Bendriem, B. The new opportunities for high time resolution clinical TOF PET. Clin. Transl. Imaging 7, 139–147 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s40336-019-00316-5
Cherry, S. R. et al. Total-Body PET: Maximizing Sensitivity to Create New Opportunities for Clinical Research and Patient Care. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med. 59, 3–12 (2018).
van Sluis, J. et al. Image quality and activity optimization in oncological 18F-FDG PET using the digital Biograph Vision PET/CT. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med., https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.119.234351 (2019).
Kim, J. Y. et al. Utilisation of combined 18F-FDG PET/CT scan for differential diagnosis between benign and malignant adrenal enlargement. Br. J. Radiol. 86, 20130190 (2013).
doi: 10.1259/bjr.20130190
Abtahi, S. M. et al. Depiction of celiac ganglia on positron emission tomography and computed tomography in patients with lung cancer. Clin. Imaging 38, 292–295 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2013.12.017
Keyes, J. W. SUV: standard uptake or silly useless value? J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med. 36, 1836–1839 (1995).
Boellaard, R., Krak, N. C., Hoekstra, O. S. & Lammertsma, A. A. Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI definition on the accuracy of standard uptake values: a simulation study. J. Nucl. Med. Off. Publ. Soc. Nucl. Med. 45, 1519–1527 (2004).
Westerterp, M. et al. Quantification of FDG PET studies using standardised uptake values in multi-centre trials: effects of image reconstruction, resolution and ROI definition parameters. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 34, 392–404 (2007).
doi: 10.1007/s00259-006-0224-1
Renz, D. M. et al. Accuracy and reproducibility of a novel semi-automatic segmentation technique for MR volumetry of the pituitary gland. Neuroradiology 53, 233–244 (2011).
doi: 10.1007/s00234-010-0727-0
Ertekin, T. et al. Comparison of three methods for the estimation of the pituitary gland volume using magnetic resonance imaging: a stereological study. Pituitary 14, 31–38 (2011).
doi: 10.1007/s11102-010-0254-3