F-18-FDG Whole Body Scan using Gamma Camera equipped with Ultra High Energy Collimator in Cancer Patients: Comparison with FDG Coincidence PET.
- Author:
Sang Moo LIM
;
Seung Dae YANG
;
Chan H PARK
;
Moonsun PAI
;
Chul Woo JOH
;
Seok Nam YOON
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Carcinoma;
F-18 FDG;
Coincidence imaging;
Coincidence detection camera;
Whole body scan;
Positron emission tomography;
Ultra high energy collimator
- MeSH:
Electrons;
Follow-Up Studies;
Gamma Cameras*;
Humans;
Liver;
Lymph Nodes;
Neoplasm Metastasis;
Positron-Emission Tomography;
Whole Body Imaging*
- From:Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine
1999;33(1):65-75
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility of 2-[fluorine-18] fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose (F-18-FDG) whole body scan (FDG W/B Scan) using dual-head gamma camera equipped with ultra high energy collimator in patients with various cancers, and compare the RESULTS with those of coincidence imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Phantom studies of planar imaging with ultra high energy and coincidence tomography (FDG CoDe PET) were performed. Fourteen patients with known or suspected maligancy were examined. F-18-FDG whole body scan was performed using dual-head gamma camera with high energy (511 keV) collimators and regional FDG CoDe PET immediately followed it. Radiological, clinical follow up and histologic RESULTS were correlated with F-18-FDG finding. RESULTS: Planar phantom study showed 13.1 mm spatial resolution at 10 cm with a sensitivity of 2638 cpm/MBq/ml. In coincidence PET, spatial resolution was 7.49 mm and sensitivity was 5351 cpm/MBq/ml. Eight out of 14 patients showed hypermetabolic sites in primary or metastatic tumors in FDG CoDe PET. The lesions showing no hypermetabolic uptake of FDG in both methods were all less than 1 cm except one lesion of 2 cm sized metastatic lymph node. The metastatic lymph nodes of positive FDG uptake were more than 1.5 cm in size or conglomerated lesions of lymph nodes less than 1 cm in size. FDG W/B scan showed similar RESULTS but had additional false positive and false negative cases. FDG W/B scan not visualize liver metastasis in one case that showed multiple metastatic sites in FDG CoDe PET. CONCLUSION:S: FDG W/B scan with specially designed collimators depicted some cancers and their metastatic sites, although it had a limitation in image quality compared to that of FDG CoDe PET. This study suggests that F-18-FDG positron imaging using dual-head gamma camera is feasible in oncology and helpful if it should be more available by regional distribution of FDG.
