Gustav K von Schulthess1, Heinz-Peter W Schlemmer. 1. Nuclear Medicine, Department of Medical Radiology, University Hospital, Raemistr. 100, CH-8091, Zurich, Switzerland. gustav.vonschulthess@usz.ch
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Integration of positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) has become a topic of increasing interest to the imaging community over the past two years. OBJECTIVES: In this text, the authors attempt to distinguish facts from fiction concerning such integrated systems. Analysis of existing information of combined imaging on existing brain PET/MR systems and imaging experience with PET-computed tomography (CT) is reviewed. Various types of system integration of PET and MR are discussed with completely independent systems on one hand and completely integrated systems with the possibility of simultaneous data acquisition on the other hand. Furthermore, it is discussed, what simultaneous data acquisition with nuclear imaging systems combined with MR or CT really means, as technical simultaneity may not be relevant in light of the pharmacokinetics of the nuclear tracers used. DISCUSSION: The authors conclude that combining PET/MR is an interesting research endeavor with uncertain outcome. They argue that, while completely simultaneous brain applications are of research interest immediately, clinical applications do not currently warrant the construction of fully integrated systems. Systems adjacent to each other, where imaging tables are linked with a patient "shuttle" thereby requiring only patient translation but no repositioning, may be a good start to assess the value of integrated PET/MR.
INTRODUCTION: Integration of positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) has become a topic of increasing interest to the imaging community over the past two years. OBJECTIVES: In this text, the authors attempt to distinguish facts from fiction concerning such integrated systems. Analysis of existing information of combined imaging on existing brain PET/MR systems and imaging experience with PET-computed tomography (CT) is reviewed. Various types of system integration of PET and MR are discussed with completely independent systems on one hand and completely integrated systems with the possibility of simultaneous data acquisition on the other hand. Furthermore, it is discussed, what simultaneous data acquisition with nuclear imaging systems combined with MR or CT really means, as technical simultaneity may not be relevant in light of the pharmacokinetics of the nuclear tracers used. DISCUSSION: The authors conclude that combining PET/MR is an interesting research endeavor with uncertain outcome. They argue that, while completely simultaneous brain applications are of research interest immediately, clinical applications do not currently warrant the construction of fully integrated systems. Systems adjacent to each other, where imaging tables are linked with a patient "shuttle" thereby requiring only patient translation but no repositioning, may be a good start to assess the value of integrated PET/MR.
Authors: Bernd J Pichler; Martin S Judenhofer; Ciprian Catana; Jeffrey H Walton; Manfred Kneilling; Robert E Nutt; Stefan B Siegel; Claus D Claussen; Simon R Cherry Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Thomas Beyer; Markus Weigert; Harald H Quick; Uwe Pietrzyk; Florian Vogt; Christoph Palm; Gerald Antoch; Stefan P Müller; Andreas Bockisch Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Bruce E Hillner; Barry A Siegel; Dawei Liu; Anthony F Shields; Ilana F Gareen; Lucy Hanna; Sharon Hartson Stine; R Edward Coleman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-03-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Didier Lardinois; Walter Weder; Thomas F Hany; Ehab M Kamel; Stephan Korom; Burkhardt Seifert; Gustav K von Schulthess; Hans C Steinert Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: C Burger; G Goerres; S Schoenes; A Buck; A H R Lonn; G K Von Schulthess Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2002-04-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Gerald Antoch; Florian M Vogt; Lutz S Freudenberg; Fridun Nazaradeh; Susanne C Goehde; Jörg Barkhausen; Gerlinde Dahmen; Andreas Bockisch; Jörg F Debatin; Stefan G Ruehm Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-12-24 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Stephanie N Histed; Maria L Lindenberg; Esther Mena; Baris Turkbey; Peter L Choyke; Karen A Kurdziel Journal: Nucl Med Commun Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 1.690
Authors: S Bisdas; T Nägele; H-P Schlemmer; A Boss; C D Claussen; B Pichler; U Ernemann Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2009-11-26 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Sasan Partovi; Andres Kohan; Christian Rubbert; Jose Luis Vercher-Conejero; Chiara Gaeta; Roger Yuh; Lisa Zipp; Karin A Herrmann; Mark R Robbin; Zhenghong Lee; Raymond F Muzic; Peter Faulhaber; Pablo R Ros Journal: Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2014-03-20
Authors: Anne Larsson; Adam Johansson; Jan Axelsson; Tufve Nyholm; Thomas Asklund; Katrine Riklund; Mikael Karlsson Journal: MAGMA Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Zheng Gu; Richard Taschereau; Nam T Vu; David L Prout; Robert W Silverman; Jason T Lee; Arion F Chatziioannou Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-06-14 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Thomas C Kwee; Taro Takahara; Malou A Vermoolen; Marc B Bierings; Willem P Mali; Rutger A J Nievelstein Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2010-07-30