Julia G Mannheim1,2,3, Ju-Chieh Kevin Cheng4,5, Nasim Vafai5, Elham Shahinfard5, Carolyn English5, Jessamyn McKenzie6, Jing Zhang7, Laura Barlow8, Vesna Sossi4. 1. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. julia.mannheim@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Werner Siemens Imaging Center, Department of Preclinical Imaging and Radiopharmacy, Eberhard-Karls University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. julia.mannheim@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 3. Cluster of Excellence iFIT (EXC 2180) "Image Guided and Functionally Instructed Tumor Therapies", University of Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany. julia.mannheim@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 4. Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 5. Pacific Parkinson's Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 6. Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, Pacific Parkinson's Research Centre, University of British Columbia & Vancouver Coastal Health, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 7. Global MR Applications & Workflow, GE Healthcare Canada, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 8. UBC MRI Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Siemens high-resolution research tomograph (HRRT - a dedicated brain PET scanner) is to this day one of the highest resolution PET scanners; thus, it can serve as useful benchmark when evaluating performance of newer scanners. Here, we report results from a cross-validation study between the HRRT and the whole-body GE SIGNA PET/MR focusing on brain imaging. Phantom data were acquired to determine recovery coefficients (RCs), % background variability (%BG), and image voxel noise (%). Cross-validation studies were performed with six healthy volunteers using [11C]DTBZ, [11C]raclopride, and [18F]FDG. Line profiles, regional time-activity curves, regional non-displaceable binding potentials (BPND) for [11C]DTBZ and [11C]raclopride scans, and radioactivity ratios for [18F]FDG scans were calculated and compared between the HRRT and the SIGNA PET/MR. RESULTS: Phantom data showed that the PET/MR images reconstructed with an ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm with time-of-flight (TOF) and TOF + point spread function (PSF) + filter revealed similar RCs for the hot spheres compared to those obtained on the HRRT reconstructed with an ordinary Poisson-OSEM algorithm with PSF and PSF + filter. The PET/MR TOF + PSF reconstruction revealed the highest RCs for all hot spheres. Image voxel noise of the PET/MR system was significantly lower. Line profiles revealed excellent spatial agreement between the two systems. BPND values revealed variability of less than 10% for the [11C]DTBZ scans and 19% for [11C]raclopride (based on one subject only). Mean [18F]FDG ratios to pons showed less than 12% differences. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated comparable performances of the two systems in terms of RCs with lower voxel-level noise (%) present in the PET/MR system. Comparison of in vivo human data confirmed the comparability of the two systems. The whole-body GE SIGNA PET/MR system is well suited for high-resolution brain imaging as no significant performance degradation was found compared to that of the reference standard HRRT.
BACKGROUND: The Siemens high-resolution research tomograph (HRRT - a dedicated brain PET scanner) is to this day one of the highest resolution PET scanners; thus, it can serve as useful benchmark when evaluating performance of newer scanners. Here, we report results from a cross-validation study between the HRRT and the whole-body GE SIGNA PET/MR focusing on brain imaging. Phantom data were acquired to determine recovery coefficients (RCs), % background variability (%BG), and image voxel noise (%). Cross-validation studies were performed with six healthy volunteers using [11C]DTBZ, [11C]raclopride, and [18F]FDG. Line profiles, regional time-activity curves, regional non-displaceable binding potentials (BPND) for [11C]DTBZ and [11C]raclopride scans, and radioactivity ratios for [18F]FDG scans were calculated and compared between the HRRT and the SIGNA PET/MR. RESULTS: Phantom data showed that the PET/MR images reconstructed with an ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm with time-of-flight (TOF) and TOF + point spread function (PSF) + filter revealed similar RCs for the hot spheres compared to those obtained on the HRRT reconstructed with an ordinary Poisson-OSEM algorithm with PSF and PSF + filter. The PET/MR TOF + PSF reconstruction revealed the highest RCs for all hot spheres. Image voxel noise of the PET/MR system was significantly lower. Line profiles revealed excellent spatial agreement between the two systems. BPND values revealed variability of less than 10% for the [11C]DTBZ scans and 19% for [11C]raclopride (based on one subject only). Mean [18F]FDG ratios to pons showed less than 12% differences. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated comparable performances of the two systems in terms of RCs with lower voxel-level noise (%) present in the PET/MR system. Comparison of in vivo human data confirmed the comparability of the two systems. The whole-body GE SIGNA PET/MR system is well suited for high-resolution brain imaging as no significant performance degradation was found compared to that of the reference standard HRRT.
Authors: Jaewon Yang; Florian Wiesinger; Sandeep Kaushik; Dattesh Shanbhag; Thomas A Hope; Peder E Z Larson; Youngho Seo Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 10.057
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
Authors: Simon R Cherry; Terry Jones; Joel S Karp; Jinyi Qi; William W Moses; Ramsey D Badawi Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-09-21 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Cristina Lois; Bjoern W Jakoby; Misty J Long; Karl F Hubner; David W Barker; Michael E Casey; Maurizio Conti; Vladimir Y Panin; Dan J Kadrmas; David W Townsend Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Syahir Mansor; Elisabeth Pfaehler; Dennis Heijtel; Martin A Lodge; Ronald Boellaard; Maqsood Yaqub Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-11-19 Impact factor: 4.071