High Physiological ¹⁸F-FDG Uptake in Normal Pituitary Gland on Digital PET Scanner

Abstract

Purpose Recently developed digital positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanners (digital PET [dPET]) have given new dimensions to molecular imaging. dPET scanner has very high sensitivity, spatial resolution, and image contrast that leads to increased uptake of signal in small-volume structures like pituitary gland (PG) making them visible on PET/CT scan even in absence of any pathology. Adequate knowledge of physiological fluoro-2 deoxy D glucose uptake in PG is required in interpretation of dPET for correct diagnosis and reducing unnecessary additional imaging. The aim of this study is to evaluate the frequency of physiological PG uptake on dPET.

Material and Methods Eighty-eight subjects (mean age, 54.44 ± 14.18 years; range, 26–84 years; 63 females and 25 males) with normal PG on magnetic resonance imaging brain and imaged within 6 months on dPET were included in this research study. Out of 88 patients, 20 control subjects (mean age, 58.15 ± 11.08 years: 15 females and 5 males) underwent PET/CT on conventional PET. All images were acquired with similar and standard acquisition protocol and reconstruction done with Time of flight with Point spread function. PG uptake was compared visually and quantitatively.

Results PG uptake was seen in 43 patients (48.8%). Out of 43 patients, 31 (72%) showed low uptake, 11 (26%) showed intermediate grade of uptake, and 1 patient (2%) showed intermediate-to-high uptake and was categorized as high-grade uptake. In the control group of 20 patients, 3 (15%) showed low uptake, while none of them showed intermediate or high uptake.

Conclusion Physiological PG uptake is commonly seen on dPET. Low-to-intermediate grade of PG uptake on dPET in an asymptomatic patient is physiological and does not require further evaluation and should be reported with caution.

Keywords

¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT - pituitary gland - digital PET - conventional PET

• References

• 1 Bergström M, Muhr C, Lundberg PO, Långström B. PET as a tool in the clinical evaluation of pituitary adenomas. J Nucl Med 1991; 32 (04) 610-615
• 2 Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med 2007; 48 (06) 932-945
• 3 Hofheinz F, Langner J, Petr J. et al. A method for model-free partial volume correction in oncological PET. EJNMMI Res 2012; 2 (01) 16
• 4 Rousset O, Rahmim A, Alavi A, Zaidi H. Partial volume correction strategies in PET. PET Clin 2007; 2 (02) 235-249
• 5 Jeong SY, Lee SW, Lee HJ. et al. Incidental pituitary uptake on whole-body 18F-FDG PET/CT: a multicentre study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010; 37 (12) 2334-2343
• 6 Wu KK, Kung BT, Au Yong TK. Incidence and clinical impact of focal pituitary uptake in 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography–computed tomography: 5-year retrospective review. Hong Kong J Radiol. 2018; 21: 48-53
• 7 Koc ZP, Ozcan P, Sezer E. et al. The clinical impact of incidental sellar uptake on F-18 FDG PET/CT. Int J Endocr Oncol 2019; 6 (02)
• 8 Koo CW, Bhargava P, Rajagopalan V, Ghesani M, Sims-Childs H, Kagetsu NJ. Incidental detection of clinically occult pituitary adenoma on whole-body FDG PET imaging. Clin Nucl Med 2006; 31 (01) 42-43
• 9 López-Mora DA, Carrió I, Flotats A. Digital PET vs analog PET: clinical implications?. Semin Nucl Med 2022; 52 (03) 302-311
• 10 van Sluis J, de Jong J, Schaar J. et al. Performance characteristics of the digital biograph vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med 2019; 60 (07) 1031-1036
• 11 Wagatsuma K, Miwa K, Sakata M. et al. Comparison between new-generation SiPM-based and conventional PMT-based TOF-PET/CT. Phys Med 2017; 42: 203-210
• 12 Meyer M, Allenbach G, Nicod Lalonde M, Schaefer N, Prior JO, Gnesin S. Increased ¹⁸F-FDG signal recovery from small physiological structures in digital PET/CT and application to the pituitary gland. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 368
• 13 Ju H, Zhou J, Pan Y, Lv J, Zhang Y. Evaluation of pituitary uptake incidentally identified on ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT scan. Oncotarget 2017; 8 (33) 55544-55549
• 14 Hyun SH, Choi JY, Lee KH, Choe YS, Kim BT. Incidental focal 18F-FDG uptake in the pituitary gland: clinical significance and differential diagnostic criteria. J Nucl Med 2011; 52 (04) 547-550
• 15 Zhang J, Maniawski P, Knopp MV. Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET/CT system. EJNMMI Res 2018; 8 (01) 97
• 16 van der Vos CS, Koopman D, Rijnsdorp S. et al. Quantification, improvement, and harmonization of small lesion detection with state-of-the-art PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2017; 44 (Suppl. 01) 4-16
• 17 Manabe O, Hirata K, Magota K. et al. Assessment of incidental pituitary uptake on FDG PET/CT scan: digital vs. conventional PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2020; 61 (Suppl. 01) 1294
• 18 Lee YS, Kim JS, Kim KM, Kang JH, Lim SM, Kim HJ. Performance measurement of PSF modeling reconstruction (True X) on Siemens Biograph TruePoint TrueV PET/CT. Ann Nucl Med 2014; 28 (04) 340-348
• 19 Knäusl B, Rausch IF, Bergmann H, Dudczak R, Hirtl A, Georg D. Influence of PET reconstruction parameters on the TrueX algorithm. A combined phantom and patient study. Nucl Med (Stuttg) 2013; 52 (01) 28-35
• 20 Hennessy S, Bilker WB, Berlin JA, Strom BL. Factors influencing the optimal control-to-case ratio in matched case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149 (02) 195-197 Erratum in: Am J Epidemiol 1999 Mar 1;149(5):489