Comparison of Methods of µ-Map Generation: MR-Based Method in PET/MR Imaging Versus Pseudo-CT Method in Radiotherapy Dose Planning

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 University of Education, Winneba, Ghana

2 University of Ghana, School of Nuclear and Allied Health Science, Ghana

3 Ghana Atomic Energy Commission, Ghana

10.22038/ijmp.2024.77457.2369

Abstract

Introduction: Attenuation correction is essential for accurate PET imaging and radiotherapy (RT) dose planning. However, PET/MR systems face a significant challenge due to the lack of direct attenuation data from MR images, unlike PET/CT where CT provides inherent attenuation information. Similarly, the increasing use of MRI in RT planning necessitates pseudo-CT methods for accurate dose calculation. This study compares MR-based µ-map generation for PET/MR and pseudo-CT methods for RT planning, addressing their challenges and limitations to improve treatment accuracy and patient care.
Material and Methods: The study involved patient selection, image processing, and generation of MR-based attenuation maps (µ-maps) for PET attenuation correction and pseudo-CTs for RT dose planning using advanced computational software.
Results: MR-based µ-maps, potentially useful for PET attenuation correction, and pseudo CTs, potentially applicable in radiotherapy planning, were successfully generated. Head images showed MR-based µ-maps overestimating bone for two patients (deviations of 4.0% and 4.2%). Both MR-based and CT µ-maps exhibited dynamic and continuous µ-values for head bone. In the pelvis, pseudo-CT underestimated bone volume in five patients (deviations of 18.7%, 21.3%, 9.6%, 14%, and 10%). Pseudo-CT's bone µ-values lacked continuity compared to CT µ-maps. Pelvis studies revealed more dynamic and broader µ-value range for muscle in CT µ-maps than pseudo-CT and MRI µ-map.
Conclusion: These findings suggest the need for careful consideration and validation of attenuation correction methods, especially in regions with complex anatomical structures, to ensure accurate treatment delivery and enhance patient care in the context of PET/MR and radiotherapy.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Teimoorisichani M, Panin V, Rothfuss H, Sari H, Rominger A, Conti M. A CT‐less approach to quantitative PET imaging using the LSO intrinsic radiation for long‐axial FOV PET scanners. Medical physics. 2022;49(1):309-23.
  2. Schwenck J, Sonanini D, Cotton JM, Rammensee H-G, la Fougère C, Zender L. Advances in PET imaging of cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer. 2023;23(7):474-90.
  3. Stefano A. Challenges and limitations in applying radiomics to PET imaging: possible opportunities and avenues for research. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 2024;179:108827.
  4. Balogh V, MacAskill MG, Hadoke PW, Gray GA, Tavares AA. Positron emission tomography techniques to measure active inflammation, fibrosis and angiogenesis: potential for non-invasive imaging of hypertensive heart failure. Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. 2021;8:719031.
  5. Crișan G, Moldovean-Cioroianu NS, Timaru D-G, Andrieș G, Căinap C, et al. Radiopharmaceuticals for PET and SPECT imaging: a literature review over the last decade. International journal of molecular sciences. 2022;23(9):5023.
  6. Windows-Yule C, Herald M, Nicuşan A, Wiggins C, Pratx G, Manger S. Recent advances in positron emission particle tracking: a comparative review. Reports on progress in physics. 2022;85(1):016101.
  7. Shahi A. Evaluation of multi-angle imaging with planar organ-targeted positron emission tomography detectors 2024.
  8. Massari R, Mok GS. New trends in single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Frontiers Media SA; 2023. p. 1349877.
  9. Galldiks N, Kaufmann TJ, Vollmuth P, Lohmann P, Smits M, Veronesi MC. Challenges, limitations, and pitfalls of PET and advanced MRI in patients with brain tumors: A report of the PET/RANO group. Neuro-oncology. 2024:noae049.
  10. Hussain S, Mubeen I, Ullah N, Shah SSUD, Khan BA, Zahoor M. Modern diagnostic imaging technique applications and risk factors in the medical field: a review. BioMed research international. 2022;2022(1):5164970.
  11. Illimoottil M, Ginat D. Recent advances in deep learning and medical imaging for head and neck cancer treatment: MRI, CT, and PET scans. Cancers. 2023;15(13):3267.
  12. Cabello J, Lukas M, Förster S, Pyka T, Nekolla SG, Ziegler SI. MR-based attenuation correction using ultrashort-echo-time pulse sequences in dementia patients. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 2015;56(3):423-9.
  13. Commandeur F, Simon A, Mathieu R, Nassef M, Arango JDO, Rolland Y. MRI to CT prostate registration for improved targeting in cancer external beam radiotherapy. IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics. 2016;21(4):1015-26.
  14. Dowling JA, Sun J, Pichler P, Rivest-Hénault D, Ghose S, Richardson H. Automatic substitute computed tomography generation and contouring for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-alone external beam radiation therapy from standard MRI sequences. International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics. 2015;93(5):1144-53.
  15. Edmund JM, Nyholm T. A review of substitute CT generation for MRI-only radiation therapy. Radiation Oncology. 2017;12:1-15.
  16. Johansson A, Karlsson M, Yu J, Asklund T, Nyholm T. Voxel‐wise uncertainty in CT substitute derived from MRI. Medical physics. 2012;39(6Part1):3283-90.
  17. Decazes P, Hinault P, Veresezan O, Thureau S, Gouel P, Vera P. Trimodality PET/CT/MRI and radiotherapy: a mini-review. Frontiers in oncology. 2021;10:614008.
  18. Pozaruk A, Pawar K, Li S, Carey A, Cheng J, Sudarshan VP. Augmented deep learning model for improved quantitative accuracy of MR-based PET attenuation correction in PSMA PET-MRI prostate imaging. European journal of nuclear
  19. Lee JS. A review of deep-learning-based approaches for attenuation correction in positron emission tomography. IEEE Transactions on Radiation and Plasma Medical Sciences. 2020;5(2):160-84.
  20. Shandiz MS, Rad HS, Ghafarian P, Karam MB, Akbarzadeh A, Ay MR. MR-guided attenuation map for prostate PET-MRI: an intensity and morphologic-based segmentation approach for generating a five-class attenuation map in pelvic region. Annals of nuclear medicine. 2017;31:29-39.
  21. Slates RB, Farahani K, Shao Y, Marsden PK, Taylor J, Summers PE. A study of artefacts in simultaneous PET and MR imaging using a prototype MR compatible PET scanner. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 1999;44(8):2015.
  22. Marshall H, Stodilka R, Theberge J, Deans, L, Sykes, .JM, et al. A comparison of MR-based attenuation correction in PET versus SPECT. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 2011;56(14):4613.
  23. Dowling JA, Lambert J, Parker J, Salvado O, Fripp J, Capp A. An atlas-based electron density mapping method for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-alone treatment planning and adaptive MRI-based prostate radiation therapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics. 2012;83(1):e5-e11.
  24. Fuchs J, Neuberger T, Rolletschek H, Schiebold S, Nguyen TH, Borisjuk N. A noninvasive platform for imaging and quantifying oil storage in submillimeter tobacco seed. Plant physiology. 2013;161(2):583-93.
  25. Hofmann M, Steinke F, Scheel V, Charpiat G, Farquhar J, Aschoff P. MRI-based attenuation correction for PET/MRI: a novel approach combining pattern recognition and atlas registration. Journal of nuclear medicine. 2008;49(11):1875-83.
  26. Carney JP, Townsend DW, Rappoport V, Bendriem B. Method for transforming CT images for attenuation correction in PET/CT imaging. Medical physics. 2006;33(4):976-83.
  27. Wagenknecht G, Kaiser H-J, Mottaghy FM, Herzog H. MRI for attenuation correction in PET: methods and challenges. Magnetic resonance materials in physics, biology and medicine. 2013;26:99-113.
  28. Arabi H, Zaidi H. Magnetic resonance imaging-guided attenuation correction in whole-body PET/MRI using a sorted atlas approach. Medical image analysis. 2016;31:1-15.
  29. Aasheim LB, Karlberg A, Goa PE, Håberg A, Sørhaug S, Fagerli U-M. PET/MR brain imaging: evaluation of clinical UTE-based attenuation correction. European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging. 2015;42:1439-46.
  30. Siversson C, Nordström F, Nilsson T, Nyholm T, Jonsson J, Gunnlaugsson A. MRI only prostate radiotherapy planning using the statistical decomposition algorithm. Medical physics. 2015;42(10):6090-7.
  31. Florkow MC, Willemsen K, Mascarenhas VV, Oei EH, van Stralen M, Seevinck PR. Magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography for Three‐Dimensional bone imaging of musculoskeletal pathologies: a review. Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging. 2022;56(1):11-34.
  32. Lee TC, Alessio AM, Miyaoka RM, Kinahan PE. Morphology supporting function: attenuation correction for SPECT/CT, PET/CT, and PET/MR imaging. The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging: official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN)[and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR),[and] Section of the Society of. 2015;60(1):25.
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 21, Issue 6 - Serial Number 6
November and December 2024
Pages 355-364

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 30 January 2024
  • Revise Date: 06 May 2024
  • Accept Date: 12 May 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics