{"title":"IMPACT OF ACQUISITION PARAMETERS ON THE QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF PET IMAGING – ANALYSIS OF THE NEMA PHANTOM","authors":"S. Rep","doi":"10.47724/mirtj.2020.i01.a005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: The aim of the research was to analyse the most common factors that influence SUV values. Material and methods: In the study, I used a NEMA body phantom filled with a mixture of water and 18F-FDG in a ratio 1:4 (background/spheres), and analysed the most common factors that influence SUV values. The most common factors include the impact of the patient's body weight, the impact of time between application and PET/CT imaging, and the impact of differently prepared and administered RP activities. Results: Different values of patient body weight, time between application and PET/CT imaging, and differently prepared and administered RF activities have a statistically significant effect on the quantitative assessment of SUVmax (p < 0.001) and SUVmean (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results showed that all factors can significantly influence the quantitative assessment of SUVmax and SUVmean.","PeriodicalId":271343,"journal":{"name":"MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIOTHERAPY JOURNAL","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIOTHERAPY JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47724/mirtj.2020.i01.a005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: The aim of the research was to analyse the most common factors that influence SUV values. Material and methods: In the study, I used a NEMA body phantom filled with a mixture of water and 18F-FDG in a ratio 1:4 (background/spheres), and analysed the most common factors that influence SUV values. The most common factors include the impact of the patient's body weight, the impact of time between application and PET/CT imaging, and the impact of differently prepared and administered RP activities. Results: Different values of patient body weight, time between application and PET/CT imaging, and differently prepared and administered RF activities have a statistically significant effect on the quantitative assessment of SUVmax (p < 0.001) and SUVmean (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results showed that all factors can significantly influence the quantitative assessment of SUVmax and SUVmean.