Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Value of image fusion using single photon emission computed tomography with integrated low dose computed tomography in comparison with a retrospective voxel-based method in neuroendocrine tumours

  • Nuclear Medicine
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The objective was the evaluation of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) with integrated low dose computed tomography (CT) in comparison with a retrospective fusion of SPECT and high-resolution CT and a side-by-side analysis for lesion localisation in patients with neuroendocrine tumours. Twenty-seven patients were examined by multidetector CT. Additionally, as part of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy (SRS), an integrated SPECT–CT was performed. SPECT and CT data were fused using software with a registration algorithm based on normalised mutual information. The reliability of the topographic assignment of lesions in SPECT–CT, retrospective fusion and side-by-side analysis was evaluated by two blinded readers. Two patients were not enrolled in the final analysis because of misregistrations in the retrospective fusion. Eighty-seven foci were included in the analysis. For the anatomical assignment of foci, SPECT–CT and retrospective fusion revealed overall accuracies of 91 and 94% (side-by-side analysis 86%). The correct identification of foci as lymph node manifestations (n=25) was more accurate by retrospective fusion (88%) than from SPECT–CT images (76%) or by side-by-side analysis (60%). Both modalities of image fusion appear to be well suited for the localisation of SRS foci and are superior to side-by-side analysis of non-fused images especially concerning lymph node manifestations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Krenning EP, Kwekkeboom DJ, Bakker WH, Breeman WA, Kooij PP, Oei HY, van Hagen M, Postema PT, de Jong M, Reubi JC et al (1993) Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy with [111In-DTPA-d-Phe1]- and [123I-Tyr3]-octreotide: the Rotterdam experience with more than 1,000 patients. Eur J Nucl Med 20(8):716–731

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Lebtahi R, Cadiot G, Sarda L, Daou D, Faraggi M, Petegnief Y, Mignon M, le Guludec D (1997) Clinical impact of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in the management of patients with neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors. J Nucl Med 38(6):853–858

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Chiti A, Briganti V, Fanti S, Monetti N, Masi R, Bombardieri E (2000) Results and potential of somatostatin receptor imaging in gastroenteropancreatic tract tumours. Q J Nucl Med 44(1):42–49

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ricke J, Klose KJ, Mignon M, Oberg K, Wiedenmann B (2001) Standardisation of imaging in neuroendocrine tumours: results of a European delphi process. Eur J Radiol 37(1):8–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schillaci O, Scopinaro F, Danieli R, Angeletti S, Tavolaro R, Annibale B, Cannas P, Marignani M, Colella AC, Delle Fave G (1997) Single photon emission computerized tomography increases the sensitivity of indium-111-pentetreotide scintigraphy in detecting abdominal carcinoids. Anticancer Res 17(3B):1753–1756

    Google Scholar 

  6. Schillaci O, Spanu A, Scopinaro F, Falchi A, Danieli R, Marongiu P, Pisu N, Madeddu G, Delle Fave G, Madeddu G (2003) Somatostatin receptor scintigraphy in liver metastasis detection from gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med 44(3):359–368

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gotthardt M, Dirkmorfeld LM, Wied MU, Rinke A, Behe MP, Schlieck A, Hoffken H, Alfke H, Joseph K, Klose KJ, Behr TM, Arnold R (2003) Influence of somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT/MRI on the clinical management of patients with gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: an analysis in 188 patients. Digestion 68(2–3):80–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chiti A, Fanti S, Savelli G, Romeo A, Bellanova B, Rodari M, van Graafeiland BJ, Monetti N, Bombardieri E (1998) Comparison of somatostatin receptor imaging, computed tomography and ultrasound in the clinical management of neuroendocrine gastro-entero-pancreatic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 25(10):1396–1403

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Amthauer H, Ruf J, Bohmig M, Lopez-Hanninen E, Rohlfing T, Wernecke KD, Plockinger U, Gutberlet M, Lemke AJ, Steinmuller T, Wiedenmann B, Felix R (2004) Diagnosis of neuroendocrine tumours by retrospective image fusion: is there a benefit? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 31(3):342–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. West JB, Fitzpatrick JM, Wang MY, Dawant BM, Maurer CR, Kessler RM, Maciunas RJ (1999) Retrospective intermodality registration techniques for images of the head: surface-based versus volume-based. IEEE Trans Med Imag 18(2):144–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tomura N, Watanabe O, Omachi K, Sakuma I, Takahashi S, Otani T, Kidani H, Watarai J (2004) Image fusion of thallium-201 SPECT and MR imaging for the assessment of recurrent head and neck tumors following flap reconstructive surgery. Eur Radiol 14(7):1249–1254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lemke AJ, Niehues SM, Hosten N, Amthauer H, Boehmig M, Stroszczynski C, Rohlfing T, Rosewicz S, Felix R (2004) Retrospective digital image fusion of multidetector CT and 18F-FDG PET: clinical value in pancreatic lesions—a prospective study with 104 patients. J Nucl Med 45(8):1279–1286

    Google Scholar 

  13. Bocher M, Balan A, Krausz Y, Shrem Y, Lonn A, Wilk M, Chisin R (2000) Gamma camera-mounted anatomical X-ray tomography: technology, system characteristics and first images. Eur J Nucl Med 27(6):619–627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Even-Sapir E, Keidar Z, Sachs J, Engel A, Bettman L, Gaitini D, Guralnik L, Werbin N, Iosilevsky G, Israel O (2001) The new technology of combined transmission and emission tomography in evaluation of endocrine neoplasms. J Nucl Med 42(7):998–1004

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hosten N, Kreissig R, Puls R, Amthauer H, Beier J, Rohlfing T, Stroszczynski C, Herbel A, Lemke AJ, Felix R (2000) Fusion of CT and PET data: methods and clinical relevance for planning laser-induced thermotherapy of liver metastases. Rofo 172(7):630–635

    Google Scholar 

  16. Krausz Y, Keidar Z, Kogan I, Even-Sapir E, Bar-Shalom R, Engel A, Rubinstein R, Sachs J, Bocher M, Agranovicz S, Chisin R, Israel O (2003) SPECT/CT hybrid imaging with 111In-pentetreotide in assessment of neuroendocrine tumours. Clin Endocrinol 59(5):565–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schillaci O, Danieli R, Manni C, Simonetti G (2004) Is SPECT/CT with a hybrid camera useful to improve scintigraphic imaging interpretation? Nucl Med Commun 25(7):705–710

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Israel O, Keidar Z, Iosilevsky G, Bettman L, Sachs J, Frenkel A (2001) The fusion of anatomic and physiologic imaging in the management of patients with cancer. Semin Nucl Med 31:191–205

    Google Scholar 

  19. Slomka PJ, Dey D, Przetak C, Aladl UE, Baum RP (2003) Automated 3-dimensional registration of stand-alone (18)F-FDG whole-body PET with CT. J Nucl Med 44(7):1156–1167

    Google Scholar 

  20. Patton JA, Delbeke D, Sandler MP (2000) Image fusion using an integrated, dual-head coincidence camera with x-ray tube-based attenuation maps. J Nucl Med 41:1364–1368

    Google Scholar 

  21. Goerres GW, Burger C, Schwitter MW, Heidelberg TN, Seifert B, Von Schulthess GW (2003) PET/CT of the abdomen: optimizing the patient breathing pattern. Eur Radiol 13(4):734–739

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Strahlenheilkunde, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Germany

    H. Amthauer, T. Denecke, J. Ruf, M. Gutberlet, R. Felix & A. J. Lemke

  2. Department of Neurosurgery, Image Guidance Laboratories, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

    T. Rohlfing

  3. Medizinische Klinik m.S. Hepatologie und Gastroenterologie, Interdisziplinäres Stoffwechsel-Centrum, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    M. Böhmig & U. Plöckinger

Authors
  1. H. Amthauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Denecke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Rohlfing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Ruf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. Böhmig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. Gutberlet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. U. Plöckinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. R. Felix
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. A. J. Lemke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to H. Amthauer.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Amthauer, H., Denecke, T., Rohlfing, T. et al. Value of image fusion using single photon emission computed tomography with integrated low dose computed tomography in comparison with a retrospective voxel-based method in neuroendocrine tumours. Eur Radiol 15, 1456–1462 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2590-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-004-2590-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation