Literature DB >> 31069816

Performance evaluation of the 5-Ring GE Discovery MI PET/CT system using the national electrical manufacturers association NU 2-2012 Standard.

Tinsu Pan1, Samuel A Einstein1, Srinivas Cheenu Kappadath1, Kira S Grogg2, Cristina Lois Gomez2, Adam M Alessio3, William C Hunter4, Georges El Fakhri2, Paul E Kinahan4, Osama R Mawlawi1.   

Abstract

The GE Discovery MI PET/CT system has a modular digital detector design allowing three, four, or five detector block rings that extend the axial field-of-view (FOV) from 15 to 25 cm in 5 cm increments. This study investigated the performance of the 5-ring system and compared it to 3- and 4-ring systems; the GE Discovery IQ system that uses conventional photomultiplier tubes; and the GE Signa PET/MR system that has a reduced transaxial FOV.
METHODS: PET performance was evaluated at three different institutions. Spatial resolution, sensitivity, counting rate performance, accuracy, and image quality were measured in accordance with National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2012 standards. The mean energy resolution, mean timing resolution, and PET/CT subsystem alignment were also measured. Phantoms were used to determine the effects of varying acquisition time and reconstruction parameters on image quality. Retrospective patient scans were reconstructed with various scan durations to evaluate the impact on image quality.
RESULTS: Results from all three institutions were similar. Radial/tangential/axial full width at half maximum spatial resolution measurements using the filtered back projection algorithm were 4.3/4.3/5.0 mm, 5.5/4.6/6.5 mm, and 7.4/5.0/6.6 mm at 1, 10, and 20 cm from the center of the FOV, respectively. Measured sensitivity at the center of the FOV (20.84 cps/kBq) was significantly higher than systems with reduced axial FOV. The peak noise-equivalent counting rate was 266.3 kcps at 20.8 kBq/ml, with a corresponding scatter fraction of 40.2%. The correction accuracy for count losses up to the peak noise-equivalent counting rate was 3.6%. For the 10-, 13-, 17-, 22-, 28-, and 37-mm spheres, contrast recoveries in the image quality phantom were measured to be 46.2%, 54.3%, 66.1%, 71.1%, 85.3%, and 89.3%, respectively. The mean energy and timing resolution were 9.55% and 381.7 ps, respectively. Phantom and patient images demonstrated excellent image quality, even at short acquisition times or low injected activity.
CONCLUSION: Compared to other PET/CT models, the extended axial FOV improved the overall PET performance of the 5-ring GE Discovery MI scanner. This system offers the potential to reduce scan times or injected activities through increased sensitivity.
© 2019 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Discovery MI-5 ring scanner; NEMA NU 2; PET/CT; instrumentation; performance characterization

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31069816      PMCID: PMC7251507          DOI: 10.1002/mp.13576

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  11 in total

1.  Influence of slice overlap on positron emission tomography image quality.

Authors:  Clare McKeown; Gerry Gillen; Mary Frances Dempsey; Caroline Findlay
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Studies of a Next-Generation Silicon-Photomultiplier-Based Time-of-Flight PET/CT System.

Authors:  David F C Hsu; Ezgi Ilan; William T Peterson; Jorge Uribe; Mark Lubberink; Craig S Levin
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 10.057

3.  Performance Characteristics of the Whole-Body Discovery IQ PET/CT System.

Authors:  Gabriel Reynés-Llompart; Cristina Gámez-Cenzano; Inmaculada Romero-Zayas; Laura Rodríguez-Bel; José L Vercher-Conejero; Josep M Martí-Climent
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2017-03-16       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Effective count rates for PET scanners with reduced and extended axial field of view.

Authors:  L R MacDonald; R L Harrison; A M Alessio; W C J Hunter; T K Lewellen; P E Kinahan
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-05-25       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system.

Authors:  Alexander M Grant; Timothy W Deller; Mohammad Mehdi Khalighi; Sri Harsha Maramraju; Gaspar Delso; Craig S Levin
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Comparison between new-generation SiPM-based and conventional PMT-based TOF-PET/CT.

Authors:  Kei Wagatsuma; Kenta Miwa; Muneyuki Sakata; Keiichi Oda; Haruka Ono; Masashi Kameyama; Jun Toyohara; Kenji Ishii
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 2.685

7.  Application and evaluation of a measured spatially variant system model for PET image reconstruction.

Authors:  Adam M Alessio; Charles W Stearns; Shan Tong; Steven G Ross; Steve Kohlmyer; Alex Ganin; Paul E Kinahan
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 8.  Advances in time-of-flight PET.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 2.685

9.  A randomized, double-blind, crossover comparison of novel continuous bed motion versus traditional bed position whole-body PET/CT imaging.

Authors:  Imke Schatka; Desiree Weiberg; Stephanie Reichelt; Nicole Owsianski-Hille; Thorsten Derlin; Georg Berding; Frank M Bengel
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2015-11-06       Impact factor: 9.236

10.  18F-FDG silicon photomultiplier PET/CT: A pilot study comparing semi-quantitative measurements with standard PET/CT.

Authors:  Lucia Baratto; Sonya Young Park; Negin Hatami; Guido Davidzon; Shyam Srinivas; Sanjiv Sam Gambhir; Andrei Iagaru
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-06-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  28 in total

Review 1.  The Importance of Time-of-Flight Reconstruction and Point Spread Modeling in the Measurement of Myocardial Blood Flow Parameters.

Authors:  James A Case
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2021-06-03       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  The image quality, lesion detectability, and acquisition time of 18F-FDG total-body PET/CT in oncological patients.

Authors:  Yi-Qiu Zhang; Peng-Cheng Hu; Run-Ze Wu; Yu-Shen Gu; Shu-Guang Chen; Hao-Jun Yu; Xiang-Qing Wang; Jun Song; Hong-Cheng Shi
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Total Body PET: Why, How, What for?

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Austin R Pantel; Joel S Karp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-04-03

Review 4.  Update on latest advances in time-of-flight PET.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 2.685

5.  Multiparametric Cardiac 18F-FDG PET in Humans: Kinetic Model Selection and Identifiability Analysis.

Authors:  Yang Zuo; Ramsey D Badawi; Cameron C Foster; Thomas Smith; Javier E López; Guobao Wang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-10-15

Review 6.  Scanner Design Considerations for Long Axial Field-of-View PET Systems.

Authors:  Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Simon R Cherry
Journal:  PET Clin       Date:  2020-11-05

7.  New standards for phantom image quality and SUV harmonization range for multicenter oncology PET studies.

Authors:  Go Akamatsu; Naoki Shimada; Keiichi Matsumoto; Hiromitsu Daisaki; Kazufumi Suzuki; Hiroshi Watabe; Keiichi Oda; Michio Senda; Takashi Terauchi; Ukihide Tateishi
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 2.668

8.  Quantifying bias and precision of kinetic parameter estimation on the PennPET Explorer, a long axial field-of-view scanner.

Authors:  Varsha Viswanath; Austin R Pantel; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Robert Doot; Mark Muzi; David A Mankoff; Joel S Karp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-09-02

9.  Performance Characteristics of Long Axial Field-of-View PET Scanners with Axial Gaps.

Authors:  Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Varsha Viswanath; Matthew E Werner; Joel S Karp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci       Date:  2020-09-28

10.  PET Image Quality Improvement for Simultaneous PET/MRI with a Lightweight MRI Surface Coil.

Authors:  Timothy W Deller; Nicholas K Mathew; Samuel A Hurley; Chad M Bobb; Alan B McMillan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.