PPTS Portal Home

Revised 2021 (Resolution 20)

Document Navigator

Document Navigator

ACR–ACNM–SNMMI–SPR PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR PERFORMING FDG-PET/CT IN ONCOLOGY

PREAMBLE

I.

INTRODUCTION

II.

INDICATIONS

III.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

A.

Physician

III.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

B.

Qualified Medical Physicist

III.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

C.

Radiologic and Nuclear Medicine Technologist

III.

QUALIFICATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF PERSONNEL

D.

Radiation Safety Officer

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

A.

Written Request for the Examination

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

B.

Patient Preparation [29-31]

1.

Prior to appointment:

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

B.

Patient Preparation [29-31]

2.

Prior to FDG injection

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

B.

Patient Preparation [29-31]

3.

Following injection (uptake period)

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

B.

Patient Preparation [29-31]

4.

Lactating Patients

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

C.

Radiopharmaceutical

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

D.

Protocol for CT Imaging

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

E.

Protocol for PET Imaging

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

1.

Situations that can lead to benign FDG-PET/CT uptake

a.

Physiologic uptake

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

1.

Situations that can lead to benign FDG-PET/CT uptake

b.

Infectious and inflammatory processes

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

1.

Situations that can lead to benign FDG-PET/CT uptake

c.

Benign tumor or tumor-like conditions

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

1.

Situations that can lead to benign FDG-PET/CT uptake

d.

Hyperplastic and dysplastic conditions

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

1.

Situations that can lead to benign FDG-PET/CT uptake

e.

Artifacts

IV.

FDG-PET/CT EXAMINATION SPECIFICATIONS

F.

Interpretation

2.

Situations that can lead to false-negative FDG-PET/CT interpretation:

V.

EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS

VI.

DOCUMENTATION

VII.

EQUIPMENT QC

VIII.

RADIATION SAFETY IN IMAGING

IX.

QUALITY CONTROL AND IMPROVEMENT, SAFETY, INFECTION CONTROL, AND PATIENT EDUCATION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

REFERENCES

1. Putzer DD, Henninger BB, Kovacs PP, et al. Accuracy and feasibility of three different methods for software-based image fusion in whole-body PET and CT. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 60:172-81, .
2. Townsend DD, Beyer TT. A combined PET/CT scanner: the path to true image fusion. Br J Radiol 75 Spec No:S24-30, .
3. Akin EE, Kuhl EE, Zeman RR. The role of FDG-PET/CT in gynecologic imaging: an updated guide to interpretation and challenges. Abdom Radiol (NY) 43:2474-2486, .
4. Akin EA, Qazi ZN, Osman M, Zeman RK. Clinical impact of FDG PET/CT in alimentary tract malignancies: an updated review. [Review]. Abdominal Radiology. 45(4):1018-1035, 2020 04.
5. Bar-Shalom RR, Yefremov NN, Guralnik LL, et al. Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 44:1200-9, .
6. Bartel TB, Haessler J, Brown TL, et al. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. Blood. 114(10):2068-76, 2009 Sep 03.
7. Berriolo-Riedinger A, Becker S, Casasnovas O, Vander Borght T, Edeline V. Role of FDG PET-CT in the treatment management of Hodgkin lymphoma. [Review]. Cancer Radiotherapie. 22(5):393-400, 2018 Sep.Cancer Radiother. 22(5):393-400, 2018 Sep.
8. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 32(27):3059-68, 2014 Sep 20.J Clin Oncol. 32(27):3059-68, 2014 Sep 20.
9. Fukui MM, Blodgett TT, Meltzer CC. PET/CT imaging in recurrent head and neck cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 24:157-63, .
10. Kandathil A, Kay FU, Butt YM, Wachsmann JW, Subramaniam RM. Role of FDG PET/CT in the Eighth Edition of TNM Staging of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. [Review]. Radiographics. 38(7):2134-2149, 2018 Nov-Dec.
11. Katal S, Gholamrezanezhad A, Kessler M, Olyaei M, Jadvar H. PET in the Diagnostic Management of Soft Tissue Sarcomas of Musculoskeletal Origin. [Review]. PET clinics. 13(4):609-621, 2018 Oct.
12. Kim JW, Roh JL, Kim JS, et al. (18)F-FDG PET/CT surveillance at 3-6 and 12 months for detection of recurrence and second primary cancer in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 109(12):2973-9, 2013 Dec 10.
13. Kunawudhi AA, Wong AA, Alkasab TT, Mahmood UU. Accuracy of FDG-PET/CT for Detection of Incidental Pre-Malignant and Malignant Colonic Lesions - Correlation with Colonoscopic and Histopathologic Findings. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 17:4143-7, .
14. Petersen RR, Hess SS, Alavi AA, Høilund-Carlsen PP. Clinical impact of FDG-PET/CT on colorectal cancer staging and treatment strategy. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 4:471-82, .
15. Schöder HH, Erdi YY, Larson SS, Yeung HH. PET/CT: a new imaging technology in nuclear medicine. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 30:1419-37, .
16. Singnurkar A, Wang J, Joshua AM, Langer DL, Metser U. 18F-FDG-PET/CT in the Staging and Management of Melanoma: A Prospective Multicenter Ontario PET Registry Study. Clinical Nuclear Medicine. 41(3):189-93, 2016 Mar.
17. Skalski JJ, Wahl RR, Meyer CC. Comparison of mutual information-based warping accuracy for fusing body CT and PET by 2 methods: CT mapped onto PET emission scan versus CT mapped onto PET transmission scan. J Nucl Med 43:1184-7, .
18. American Medical Association. AMA CPT® Codebook. Chicago, IL; 2020.
19. Coleman RR, Delbeke DD, Guiberteau MM, et al. Concurrent PET/CT with an integrated imaging system: intersociety dialogue from the joint working group of the American College of Radiology, the Society of Nuclear Medicine, and the Society of Computed Body Tomography and Magnetic Resonance. J Nucl Med 46:1225-39, .
20. American College of Radiology. ACR-SPR Practice Parameter for Imaging Pregnant or Potentially Pregnant Patients with Ionizing Radiation. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=23+&releaseId=2.
21. American College of Radiology. ACR-AAPM Technical Standard for Medical Physics Performance Monitoring of PET/CT Imaging Equipment. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=198+&releaseId=2
22. Fusion imaging: a new type of technologist for a new type of technology. July 31, 2002. J Nucl Med Technol. 2002 Dec;30(4):201-4.
23. American College of Radiology. ACR–SPR Practice Parameter for Performing and Interpreting Diagnostic Computed Tomography (CT). Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=132+&releaseId=2
24. American College of Radiology. ACR–ACNM–SNMMI–SPR Practice Parameter for the Use of Radiopharmaceuticals in Diagnostic Procedures. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=171+&releaseId=2
25. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10 CFR 35.50 Training for radiation safety officer and associate radiation safety officer. Available at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part035/part035-0050.html.
26. American College of Radiology. ACR–ASNR–SPR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Computed Tomography (CT) of the Extracranial Head and Neck. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=169+&releaseId=2
27. American College of Radiology. ACR-SABI-SPR-STR Practice Parameter for the Performance of Thoracic Computed Tomography (CT). Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=13+&releaseId=2
28. American College of Radiology. ACR–SABI–SAR–SPR PRACTICE PARAMETER FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY (CT) OF THE ABDOMEN AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY (CT) OF THE PELVIS. Available at: https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=168+&releaseId=2
29. Boellaard RR, Delgado-Bolton RR, Oyen WW, et al. FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:328-54, .
30. Shankar LL, Hoffman JJ, Bacharach SS, et al. Consensus recommendations for the use of 18F-FDG PET as an indicator of therapeutic response in patients in National Cancer Institute Trials. J Nucl Med 47:1059-66, .
31. Surasi DD, Bhambhvani PP, Baldwin JJ, Almodovar SS, O'Malley JJ. ¹8F-FDG PET and PET/CT patient preparation: a review of the literature. J Nucl Med Technol 42:5-13, .
32. Gelfand MM, O'hara SS, Curtwright LL, Maclean JJ. Pre-medication to block [(18)F]FDG uptake in the brown adipose tissue of pediatric and adolescent patients. Pediatr Radiol 35:984-90, .
33. Wong K, Brady S, Doubrovin M, et al. Propranolol decreases 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose uptake in brown adipose tissue on pediatric oncology PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2018;59:310.
34. American College of Radiology. ACR–SIR Practice Parameter For Minimal and/or Moderate Sedation/Analgesia. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=95+&releaseId=2
35. Barrington SS, Maisey MM. Skeletal muscle uptake of fluorine-18-FDG: effect of oral diazepam. J Nucl Med 37:1127-9, .
36. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACMUI Activities: Overview. Available at: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/slides/2019/20190404/acmui-20190404.pdf.
37. American College of Radiology, Radiological Society of North America, American Society of Radiologic Technologists, American of Physicists in Medicine. Optimizing oncologic FDG-PET/CT scans to decrease radiation exposure. Available at: https://www.imagewisely.org/Imaging-Modalities/Nuclear-Medicine/Optimizing-Oncologic-FDG-PETCT-Scans. .
38. Treves ST, Gelfand MJ, Fahey FH, Parisi MT. 2016 Update of the North American Consensus Guidelines for Pediatric Administered Radiopharmaceutical Activities. J Nucl Med. 2016 Dec;57(12):15N-18N.
39. Otero HH, Yap JJ, Patak MM, et al. Evaluation of low-density neutral oral contrast material in PET/CT for tumor imaging: results of a randomized clinical trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:326-32, .
40. Antoch GG, Jentzen WW, Freudenberg LL, et al. Effect of oral contrast agents on computed tomography-based positron emission tomography attenuation correction in dual-modality positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging. Invest Radiol 38:784-9, .
41. Cohade CC, Osman MM, Nakamoto YY, et al. Initial experience with oral contrast in PET/CT: phantom and clinical studies. J Nucl Med 44:412-6, .
42. Dizendorf EE, Hany TT, Buck AA, von Schulthess GG, Burger CC. Cause and magnitude of the error induced by oral CT contrast agent in CT-based attenuation correction of PET emission studies. J Nucl Med 44:732-8, .
43. Mawlawi OO, Erasmus JJ, Munden RR, et al. Quantifying the effect of IV contrast media on integrated PET/CT: clinical evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 186:308-19, .
44. Radiological Society of North America. FDG-PET/CT UPICT V1.0. Available at: http://www.rsna.org/uploadedFiles/RSNA/Content/Science_and_Education/QIBA/UPICT_FDG-PET_Protocol_ver08July2014.pdf.
45. Boellaard RR. Standards for PET image acquisition and quantitative data analysis. J Nucl Med 50 Suppl 1:11S-20S, .
46. American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameter for Communication of Diagnostic Imaging Findings. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=74+&releaseId=2
47. Niederkohr RR, Greenspan BB, Prior JJ, et al. Reporting guidance for oncologic 18F-FDG PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med 54:756-61, .
48. Perry K, Tann M, Miller M. Which reference tissue is best for semiquantitative determination of FDG activity? Journal of nuclear medicine technology 2008:Supplement 1: 425.
49. Agress HH, Wong TT, Shreve PP. Interpretation and reporting of positron emission tomography-computed tomographic scans. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 29:283-90, .
50. Kinahan PP, Fletcher JJ. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography standardized uptake values in clinical practice and assessing response to therapy. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 31:496-505, .
51. Rohren EE. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography reporting in radiation therapy planning and response assessment. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 31:516-29, .
52. Wahl RR, Jacene HH, Kasamon YY, Lodge MM. From RECIST to PERCIST: Evolving Considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50 Suppl 1:122S-50S, .
53. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U, et al. Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET Study Group. Eur J Cancer 1999;35:1773-82.
54. American College of Radiology. ACR–AAPM Technical Standard for Nuclear Medical Physics Performance Monitoring of Gamma Cameras. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=196+&releaseId=2
55. American College of Radiology. ACR–AAPM Technical Standard for Diagnostic Medical Physics Performance Monitoring of Computed Tomography (CT) Equipment. Available at https://gravitas.acr.org/PPTS/GetDocumentView?docId=131+&releaseId=2