PURPOSE: The new GE Discovery STE and Discovery VCT respectively combine 16-slice and 64-slice CT with PET. The PET scanner has a new BGO detector block of 8 x 6 matrix (6.3 x 4.7 x 30 mm(3)). The aim of this study was to test the performance of the new scanner. METHODS: The PET performance evaluation was done using NEMA methodology. Owing to improved front-end electronics, the system was tested with different energy window and coincidence timing settings. RESULTS: Transaxial resolution FWHM for 2D(3D) mode at 1 cm offset from the centre of the field of view (R1) was 4.87 mm (5.12 mm) and at 10 cm off centre (R10) radially 5.70 mm (5.89 mm) and tangentially 5.84 mm (5.47 mm). The axial resolutions were 4.4 mm (5.18 mm) (R1) and 5.99 mm (5.86 mm) (R10). The sensitivities were 2.3 cps/kBq (8.8 cps/kBq) (R0, centre of field of view) and 2.3 cps/kBq (8.9 cps/kBq) (R10). The system scatter fraction was 21.4% in 2D at an energy of 375 keV (33.9% in 3D mode at a higher energy of 425 keV). Peak noise equivalent count rates (k=1) were 84.9 kcps at 43.9 kBq/ml (2D) and 67.6 kcps at 12.1 kBq/ml (3D). In image quality measurement the hot sphere to background contrast with 10- to 22-mm diameter spheres varied from 14% to 68%, being slightly better in 3D than in 2D mode. Cold sphere contrast was 67% in 2D and 59% in 3D mode. CONCLUSION: GE's new STE and VCT PET/CT systems have improved spatial resolution without loss in sensitivity. When compared with the LYSO crystal-based GE Discovery RX, the resolution and scatter fraction are comparable, the count rate capability is lower but the sensitivity is higher.
PURPOSE: The new GE Discovery STE and Discovery VCT respectively combine 16-slice and 64-slice CT with PET. The PET scanner has a new BGO detector block of 8 x 6 matrix (6.3 x 4.7 x 30 mm(3)). The aim of this study was to test the performance of the new scanner. METHODS: The PET performance evaluation was done using NEMA methodology. Owing to improved front-end electronics, the system was tested with different energy window and coincidence timing settings. RESULTS: Transaxial resolution FWHM for 2D(3D) mode at 1 cm offset from the centre of the field of view (R1) was 4.87 mm (5.12 mm) and at 10 cm off centre (R10) radially 5.70 mm (5.89 mm) and tangentially 5.84 mm (5.47 mm). The axial resolutions were 4.4 mm (5.18 mm) (R1) and 5.99 mm (5.86 mm) (R10). The sensitivities were 2.3 cps/kBq (8.8 cps/kBq) (R0, centre of field of view) and 2.3 cps/kBq (8.9 cps/kBq) (R10). The system scatter fraction was 21.4% in 2D at an energy of 375 keV (33.9% in 3D mode at a higher energy of 425 keV). Peak noise equivalent count rates (k=1) were 84.9 kcps at 43.9 kBq/ml (2D) and 67.6 kcps at 12.1 kBq/ml (3D). In image quality measurement the hot sphere to background contrast with 10- to 22-mm diameter spheres varied from 14% to 68%, being slightly better in 3D than in 2D mode. Cold sphere contrast was 67% in 2D and 59% in 3D mode. CONCLUSION: GE's new STE and VCT PET/CT systems have improved spatial resolution without loss in sensitivity. When compared with the LYSO crystal-based GE Discovery RX, the resolution and scatter fraction are comparable, the count rate capability is lower but the sensitivity is higher.
Authors: Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Joel S Karp; Michael E Casey; Frank P DiFilippo; Horace Hines; Gerd Muehllehner; Vilim Simcic; Charles W Stearns; Lars-Eric Adam; Steve Kohlmyer; Vesna Sossi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Osama Mawlawi; Donald A Podoloff; Steve Kohlmyer; John J Williams; Charles W Stearns; Randall F Culp; Homer Macapinlac Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Marco Brambilla; Chiara Secco; Marco Dominietto; Roberta Matheoud; Gianmauro Sacchetti; Eugenio Inglese Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: J S Karp; M E Daube-Witherspoon; E J Hoffman; T K Lewellen; J M Links; W H Wong; R D Hichwa; M E Casey; J G Colsher; R E Hitchens Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 1991-12 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Suleman Surti; Austin Kuhn; Matthew E Werner; Amy E Perkins; Jeffrey Kolthammer; Joel S Karp Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Stephen R Bowen; Larry A Pierce; Adam M Alessio; Chi Liu; Scott D Wollenweber; Charles W Stearns; Paul E Kinahan Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2014-09-24
Authors: Tommi Kokki; Hannu T Sipilä; Mika Teräs; Tommi Noponen; Nicolas Durand-Schaefer; Riku Klén; Juhani Knuuti Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Jonathan B Moody; Benjamin C Lee; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Venkatesh L Murthy Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Anne Roivainen; Sannamari Hautaniemi; Timo Möttönen; Pirjo Nuutila; Vesa Oikonen; Riitta Parkkola; Luminita Pricop; Rudyard Ress; Nicholas Seneca; Marko Seppänen; Timo Yli-Kerttula Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-11-15 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Kim Francis Andersen; Kristin Skougaard; Anne Lerberg Nielsen; Helle Westergren Hendel Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 2.967
Authors: H Honka; J Mäkinen; J C Hannukainen; M Tarkia; V Oikonen; M Teräs; V Fagerholm; T Ishizu; A Saraste; C Stark; T Vähäsilta; P Salminen; A Kirjavainen; M Soinio; A Gastaldelli; J Knuuti; P Iozzo; P Nuutila Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2013-01-20 Impact factor: 10.122