SNM Annual Meeting Abstracts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     




J Nucl Med. 2011; 52 (Supplement 1):2457
This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kalthoff, A.
Right arrow Articles by Agha, L.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kalthoff, A.
Right arrow Articles by Agha, L.

Technologist Student Abstracts

Technologist Student Poster Session: Technologist Student Posters

Dual tracer single acquisition PET/CT scans utilizing 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG for oncologic applications

Andrew Kalthoff1, Thomas Heston2, James Littlefield3 and Lina Agha4

1 Department of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapeutics, Doisy College of Health Sciences, St. Louis University, St. Louis, MO 2 Nuclear Medicine, Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, MD 3 Nuclear Medicine Division, St. John's Mercy Medical Center, St. Louis, MO 4 Tawam Molecular Imaging Centre, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates

Abstract No. 2457

Objectives: Dual tracer single acquisition (DTSA) PET/CT scans utilizing 18F-NaF and 18F-FDG in oncology have been utilized to simultaneously image for skeletal and soft tissue metastases. The method involves the injection of 18F-NaF plus 18F-FDG in a single syringe followed by a single PET/CT acquisition. The FDG-to-NaF ratio can be subjective, based upon the clinical indication. What is not well known is the optimal FDG-to-NaF ratio in terms of visual analysis, and the effect of DTSA upon the reference background liver SUV.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients referred for clinical reasons for DTSA PET/CT imaging. Head-to-toe imaging utilizing a total dose of 10 mCi was used, with 3D acquisition at 2.5 min/bed after a 90-minute uptake time. Using a qualitative visual estimate of scan quality, we determined the optimum FDG-to-NaF ratio. The average and maximum liver SUV was obtained, calculated based upon the injected FDG dose. The DTSA liver SUV was compared to both an unmatched group and a group matched for age, uptake time, and body mass index of patients who had undergone FDG only PET/CT.

Results: There were 14 DTSA patients with FDG-to-NaF ratios ranging from 4.1:1 to 0.7:1. Visually, the optimum ratio was 3:1. The average liver SUV in DTSA patients was 1.85 +/- 0.31 versus 1.6 +/- 0.33 for the unmatched group (p < 0.02, n=114) versus 1.61 +/- 0.35 for the matched group (p=0.11, n=14). The SUV-max in DTSA patients was 2.28 +/- 0.39 versus 1.95 +/- 0.38 in the unmatched (p < 0.01, n=108) versus 1.98 +/- 0.40 in the matched group (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: An FDG-to-NaF ratio of 3:1 was determined to be optimal for DTSA PET/CT. The reference background liver SUV appears to be slightly higher in DTSA compared to FDG-only scans





This Article
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kalthoff, A.
Right arrow Articles by Agha, L.
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Kalthoff, A.
Right arrow Articles by Agha, L.