OBJECTIVE: One trend in positron emission tomography (PET) instrumentation over the last decade has been the development of scanners dedicated to small animals such as rats and mice. Thicker crystals, which are necessary to obtain higher sensitivity, result in degraded spatial resolution in the peripheral field-of-view (FOV) owing to the parallax error. On the other hand, we are developing the jPET-D4, which is a dedicated human brain PET scanner that has a capability for depth-of-interaction (DOI) measurement. Although its crystal width is about twice that of commercially available small animal PET scanners, we expect the jPET-D4 to have a potential for small animal imaging by making full use of the DOI information. In this article, we investigate the jPET-D4's potential for small animal imaging by comparing it with the microPET Focus220, a state-of-the-art PET scanner dedicated to small animals. METHODS: The jPET-D4 uses four-layered GSO crystals measuring 2.9 mm x 2.9 mm x 7.5 mm, whereas the microPET Focus220 uses a single layer of LSO crystals measuring 1.5 mm x 1.5 mm x 10.0 mm. First, the absolute sensitivity, counting rate performance and spatial resolution of both scanners were measured. Next a small hot-rod phantom was used to compare their imaging performance. Finally, a rat model with breast tumors was imaged using the jPET-D4. RESULTS: Thanks to the thicker crystals and the longer axial FOV, the jPET-D4 had more than four times higher sensitivity than the microPET Focus220. The noise equivalent counting-rate performance of the jPETD4 reached 1,024 kcps for a rat-size phantom, whereas that of the microPET Focus220 reached only 165 kcps. At the center of the FOV, the resolution was 1.7 mm for the microPET Focus220, whereas it was 3.2 mm for the jPET-D4. On the other hand, the difference of resolution became smaller at the off-center position because the radial resolution degraded faster for the microPET Focus220. The results of phantom imaging showed that the jPET-D4 was comparable to the microPET Focus220 at the off-center position even as the microPET Focus220 outperformed the jPET-D4 except for the peripheral FOV. CONCLUSIONS: The jPET-D4 human brain PET scanner, which was designed to achieve not only high resolution but also high sensitivity by measuring DOI information, was proven to have a potential for small animal imaging.
OBJECTIVE: One trend in positron emission tomography (PET) instrumentation over the last decade has been the development of scanners dedicated to small animals such as rats and mice. Thicker crystals, which are necessary to obtain higher sensitivity, result in degraded spatial resolution in the peripheral field-of-view (FOV) owing to the parallax error. On the other hand, we are developing the jPET-D4, which is a dedicated human brain PET scanner that has a capability for depth-of-interaction (DOI) measurement. Although its crystal width is about twice that of commercially available small animal PET scanners, we expect the jPET-D4 to have a potential for small animal imaging by making full use of the DOI information. In this article, we investigate the jPET-D4's potential for small animal imaging by comparing it with the microPET Focus220, a state-of-the-art PET scanner dedicated to small animals. METHODS: The jPET-D4 uses four-layered GSO crystals measuring 2.9 mm x 2.9 mm x 7.5 mm, whereas the microPET Focus220 uses a single layer of LSO crystals measuring 1.5 mm x 1.5 mm x 10.0 mm. First, the absolute sensitivity, counting rate performance and spatial resolution of both scanners were measured. Next a small hot-rod phantom was used to compare their imaging performance. Finally, a rat model with breast tumors was imaged using the jPET-D4. RESULTS: Thanks to the thicker crystals and the longer axial FOV, the jPET-D4 had more than four times higher sensitivity than the microPET Focus220. The noise equivalent counting-rate performance of the jPETD4 reached 1,024 kcps for a rat-size phantom, whereas that of the microPET Focus220 reached only 165 kcps. At the center of the FOV, the resolution was 1.7 mm for the microPET Focus220, whereas it was 3.2 mm for the jPET-D4. On the other hand, the difference of resolution became smaller at the off-center position because the radial resolution degraded faster for the microPET Focus220. The results of phantom imaging showed that the jPET-D4 was comparable to the microPET Focus220 at the off-center position even as the microPET Focus220 outperformed the jPET-D4 except for the peripheral FOV. CONCLUSIONS: The jPET-D4 human brain PET scanner, which was designed to achieve not only high resolution but also high sensitivity by measuring DOI information, was proven to have a potential for small animal imaging.
Authors: Yongfeng Yang; Sara St James; Yibao Wu; Huini Du; Jinyi Qi; Richard Farrell; Purushottam A Dokhale; Kanai S Shah; Keith Vaigneur; Simon R Cherry Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2010-11-30 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Haithem Bouziri; Catherine M Pepin; Konin Koua; Maher Benhouria; Caroline Paulin; Jinsong Ouyang; Marc Normandin; Jean-François Pratte; Georges El Fakhri; Roger Lecomte; Réjean Fontaine Journal: IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci Date: 2021-05-04