Literature DB >> 27812923

The Effect of Defective PET Detectors in Clinical Simultaneous [18F]FDG Time-of-Flight PET/MR Imaging.

Edwin E G W Ter Voert1,2, Gaspar Delso3, Felipe de Galiza Barbosa4,5, Martin Huellner4,5,6, Patrick Veit-Haibach4,5,7.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of defective positron emission tomography (PET) detectors on clinical PET image quality in simultaneous PET/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for both time-of-flight (TOF) and non-TOF reconstructed images. PROCEDURES: A total of six patients with various malignant tumors were included and underwent a 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-D-glucose PET scan in a fully functional simultaneous TOF PET/MRI. TOF and non-TOF PET images were reconstructed before and after simulating defective detector units. All images were clinically assessed and scored. In addition, a quantitative assessment was performed. Differences were ascertained and compared using the Wilcoxon matched pairs signed-rank test.
RESULTS: Without TOF, the image artifacts introduced by one defective detector unit already started to degrade the overall image quality. It reduced the confidence and could lead to a change in diagnosis. Simulating three or five defective detector units resulted in more artifacts and further reduced overall image quality and confidence. By including TOF information, the effects were mitigated: Images reconstructed with one defective detector unit had similar scores as the ones without defective units. The average absolute percentage error for one, three, and five defective detector units were respectively 8, 20, and 37 % for the non-TOF cases and only 5, 11, and 19 % for the TOF cases.
CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that PET image artifacts due to (simulated) defective detectors are significantly mitigated with the integration of TOF information in simultaneous PET/MR. One defective detector unit introduces, on average, a 5 % absolute percentage error. However, in TOF imaging, even in cases with one or three defective units for head and neck imaging and one defective unit for chest and abdominal imaging, overall image quality, artifact scoring, and reader confidence are not significantly degraded.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical; Defective detectors; PET/MR; Simulation; Time-of-flight

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27812923     DOI: 10.1007/s11307-016-1023-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol        ISSN: 1536-1632            Impact factor:   3.488


  23 in total

1.  Quality assurance in PET: evaluation of the clinical relevance of detector defects.

Authors:  R Buchert; K H Bohuslavizki; J Mester; M Clausen
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 10.057

Review 2.  An outlook on future design of hybrid PET/MRI systems.

Authors:  Habib Zaidi; Alberto Del Guerra
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Investigation of time-of-flight benefit for fully 3-D PET.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Joel S Karp; Lucretiu M Popescu; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Matthew Werner
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Effect of Time-of-Flight Information on PET/MR Reconstruction Artifacts: Comparison of Free-breathing versus Breath-hold MR-based Attenuation Correction.

Authors:  Gaspar Delso; Mohammed Khalighi; Edwin Ter Voert; Felipe Barbosa; Tetsuro Sekine; Martin Hüllner; Patrick Veit-Haibach
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Design considerations for a limited angle, dedicated breast, TOF PET scanner.

Authors:  S Surti; J S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-05-06       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 6.  How does PET/MR work? Basic physics for physicians.

Authors:  Gaspar Delso; Edwin Ter Voert; Patrick Veit-Haibach
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2015-08

Review 7.  Update on time-of-flight PET imaging.

Authors:  Suleman Surti
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 10.057

8.  Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner.

Authors:  Gaspar Delso; Sebastian Fürst; Björn Jakoby; Ralf Ladebeck; Carl Ganter; Stephan G Nekolla; Markus Schwaiger; Sibylle I Ziegler
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 10.057

9.  Improvement in lesion detection with whole-body oncologic time-of-flight PET.

Authors:  Georges El Fakhri; Suleman Surti; Cathryn M Trott; Joshua Scheuermann; Joel S Karp
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 10.057

10.  Accurate PET/MR quantification using time of flight MLAA image reconstruction.

Authors:  R Boellaard; M B M Hofman; O S Hoekstra; A A Lammertsma
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.488

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.