Literature DB >> 31816616

Numerical observer study of lesion detectability for a long axial field-of-view whole-body PET imager using the PennPET Explorer.

Varsha Viswanath1, Margaret E Daube Witherspoon, Joel S Karp, Suleman Surti.   

Abstract

This work uses lesion detectability to characterize the performance of long axial field of view (AFOV) PET scanners which have increased sensitivity compared to clinical scanners. Studies were performed using the PennPET Explorer, a 70 cm long AFOV scanner built at the University of Pennsylvania, for small lesions distributed in a uniform water-filled cylinder (simulations and measurements), an anthropomorphic torso phantom (measurement), and a human subject (measurement). The lesion localization and detection task was quantified numerically using a generalized scan statistics methodology. Detectability was studied as a function of background activity distribution, scan duration for a single bed position, and axial location of the lesions. For the cylindrical phantom, the areas under the localization receiver operating curve (ALROCs) of lesions placed at various axial locations in the scanner were greater than 0.8-a value considered to be clinically acceptable (i.e. 80% probability of detecting lesion)-for scan times of 60 s or longer for standard-of-care (SoC) clinical dose levels. 10 mm diameter lesions placed in the anthropomorphic phantom and human subject resulted in ALROCs of 0.8 or greater for scan times longer than 30 s in the lung region and 60 s in the liver region, also for SoC doses. ALROC results from all three activity distributions show similar trends as a function of counts detected per axial location. These results will be used to guide decisions on imaging parameters, such as scan time and patient dose, when imaging patients in a single bed position on long AFOV systems and can also be applied to clinical scanners with consideration of the sensitivity differences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31816616      PMCID: PMC7261597          DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab6011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  18 in total

1.  Application of a generalized scan statistic model to evaluate TOF PET images.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Joel S Karp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.679

2.  Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner.

Authors:  B W Jakoby; Y Bercier; M Conti; M E Casey; B Bendriem; D W Townsend
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-03-22       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Small nodule detectability evaluation using a generalized scan-statistic model.

Authors:  Lucreţiu M Popescu; Robert M Lewitt
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-11-15       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Performance evaluation of the Ingenuity TF PET/CT scanner with a focus on high count-rate conditions.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Kolthammer; Kuan-Hao Su; Anu Grover; Manoj Narayanan; David W Jordan; Raymond F Muzic
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Performance Evaluation of the Vereos PET/CT System According to the NEMA NU2-2012 Standard.

Authors:  Ivo Rausch; Agustin Ruiz; Itziar Valverde-Pascual; Jacobo Cal-González; Thomas Beyer; Ignasi Carrio
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 10.057

6.  First Human Imaging Studies with the EXPLORER Total-Body PET Scanner.

Authors:  Ramsey D Badawi; Hongcheng Shi; Pengcheng Hu; Shuguang Chen; Tianyi Xu; Patricia M Price; Yu Ding; Benjamin A Spencer; Lorenzo Nardo; Weiping Liu; Jun Bao; Terry Jones; Hongdi Li; Simon R Cherry
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 10.057

7.  Human- and model-observer performance in ramp-spectrum noise: effects of regularization and object variability.

Authors:  C K Abbey; H H Barrett
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 2.129

8.  Automated model-based quantitative analysis of phantoms with spherical inserts in FDG PET scans.

Authors:  Ethan J Ulrich; John J Sunderland; Brian J Smith; Imran Mohiuddin; Jessica Parkhurst; Kristin A Plichta; John M Buatti; Reinhard R Beichel
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-11-23       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Design Study of a Whole-Body PET Scanner with Improved Spatial and Timing Resolution.

Authors:  S Surti; Adam R Shore; Joel S Karp
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2013-07-02       Impact factor: 1.679

10.  PennPET Explorer: Human Imaging on a Whole-Body Imager.

Authors:  Austin R Pantel; Varsha Viswanath; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Jacob G Dubroff; Gerd Muehllehner; Michael J Parma; Daniel A Pryma; Erin K Schubert; David A Mankoff; Joel S Karp
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 11.082

View more
  4 in total

1.  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

2.  The feasibility of ultralow-activity 18F-FDG dynamic PET imaging in lung adenocarcinoma patients through total-body PET/CT scanner.

Authors:  Jing Lv; Hongyan Yin; Haojun Yu; Guobing Liu; Hongcheng Shi
Journal:  Ann Nucl Med       Date:  2022-07-20       Impact factor: 2.258

3.  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

4.  Benefit of Improved Performance with State-of-the Art Digital PET/CT for Lesion Detection in Oncology.

Authors:  Suleman Surti; Varsha Viswanath; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Maurizio Conti; Michael E Casey; Joel S Karp
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2020-03-20       Impact factor: 11.082

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.