PURPOSE

We investigated the usability of standardized uptake values (SUV) obtained from both two- and three-dimensional (2D and 3D) positron-emission tomography and computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging, and compared the images obtained from these techniques in terms of image quality, lesion detectability, and the presence of artifacts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Image data from 100 patients, who had undergone two PET imagings obtained in 2D and 3D mode after a low dose CT, were evaluated prospectively. Subjective analysis of 2D and 3D images was performed by two readers evaluating the following criteria: overall image quality, detectability of each identified lesion, and the presence of artifacts. The lesions recognized by the readers were also analyzed quantitatively by measuring SUV values.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference between the SUVs obtained in 2D and 3D modes. Regardless if the first scan was performed in 2D or 3D mode, the values obtained from 3D imaging were significantly lower than those obtained from 2D imaging (mean SUVmax was 10.48±7.57 for 2D, and 9.66±6.93 for 3D, P < 0.001). Visual analysis did not reveal significant differences regarding lesion detectability between two modes.

CONCLUSION

In oncological PET-CT applications, SUV values are significantly lower in 3D compared with 2D mode. Thus when serial scanning is needed to evaluate response to therapy in the same patient, the imaging modality should be taken into account and performed with the same method to avoid misinterpretation. Additionally, 3D PET-CT imaging can be used instead of 2D PET-CT due to its shorter scanning time without loss of lesion detectability.