An extended bore length solid-state digital-BGO PET/CT system: design, preliminary experience, and performance characteristics.
BGO
Bismuth germanium oxide
Long axial field-of-view
PET/CT
Solid-state
Journal
European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging
ISSN: 1619-7089
Titre abrégé: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101140988
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Nov 2023
28 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
19
07
2023
accepted:
06
11
2023
medline:
28
11
2023
pubmed:
28
11
2023
entrez:
27
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
A solid-state PET/CT system uses bismuth germanium oxide (BGO) scintillating crystals coupled to silicon photomultipliers over an extended 32 cm axial field-of-view (FOV) to provide high spatial resolution and very high sensitivity. Performance characteristics were determined for this digital-BGO system, including NEMA and EARL standards. Spatial resolution, scatter fraction (SF), noise equivalent count rate (NECR), sensitivity, count rate accuracy, and image quality (IQ) were evaluated for the digital-BGO system as per NEMA NU 2-2018, at 2 sites of first clinical install. System energy resolution was measured. Bayesian penalized-likelihood reconstruction (BPL) was used for IQ. EARL Standards 2 studies were reconstructed by BPL combined with a contrast-enhancing deep learning algorithm. An Esser PET phantom was evaluated. Three patient examples were obtained with low-dose radiotracer activity: 2 MBq/kg of [ NEMA sensitivity was 47.6 cps/kBq at the axial center. Spatial resolution at 1 cm from the center axis was ≤4.5 mm (filtered back projection) and ≤3.8 mm (ordered subset expectation maximization). SF was 35.6%, count rate accuracy was 2.16%, and peak NECR was 485.2 kcps at 16.9 kBq/mL. Contrast for IQ was 61.1 to 90.7% (smallest to largest sphere) with background variations from 7.6 to 2.1%, and a "lung" error of 4.7%. The average detector energy resolution was 9.67%. Image quality for patient scans was good. EARL Standards 2 criteria were robustly met and Esser phantom features ≥4.8 mm were resolved at 2 min per bed position. A solid-state 32 cm axial FOV digital-BGO PET/CT system provides good spatial and energy resolution, high count rates, and superior NEMA sensitivity in its class, enabling fast clinical acquisitions with low-dose radiotracer activity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38012446
doi: 10.1007/s00259-023-06514-8
pii: 10.1007/s00259-023-06514-8
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
Références
Kwiecinski J, Wolny R, Chwala A, Slomka P. Advances in the assessment of coronary artery disease activity with PET/CT and CTA. Tomography. 2023;9:328–41. https://doi.org/10.3390/tomography9010026 .
doi: 10.3390/tomography9010026
pubmed: 36828378
pmcid: 9962109
Voss SD. SPECT/CT, PET/CT and PET/MRI: oncologic and infectious applications and protocol considerations. Pediatr Radiol. 2023;53:1443–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05597-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00247-023-05597-7
pubmed: 36899268
Lagarde J, Sarazin M, Bottlaender M. In vivo PET imaging of neuroinflammation in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neural Transm (Vienna). 2018;125:847–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00702-017-1731-x .
doi: 10.1007/s00702-017-1731-x
pubmed: 28516240
Keidar Z, Haim N, Guralnik L, Wollner M, Bar-Shalom R, Ben-Nun A, et al. PET/CT using
pubmed: 15471827
Nakanishi K, Hirano Y, Yamamoto S. Comparison of noise equivalent count rates (NECRs) for the PET systems with different ring diameter and electronics. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2019;3:371–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRPMS.2018.2876410 .
doi: 10.1109/TRPMS.2018.2876410
Surti S, Werner ME, Karp JS. Study of PET scanner designs using clinical metrics to optimize the scanner axial FOV and crystal thickness. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:3995–4012. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/58/12/3995 .
doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/58/12/3995
pubmed: 23685783
pmcid: 3712794
Degenhardt C, Prescher G, Frach T, Thon A, de Gruyter R, Schmitz A, et al. The digital Silicon Photomultiplier — a novel sensor for the detection of scintillation light. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC). 2009;2009:2383–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2009.5402190 .
doi: 10.1109/NSSMIC.2009.5402190
Nadig V, Herrmann K, Mottaghy FM, Schulz V. Hybrid total-body PET scanners-current status and future perspectives. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:445–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-021-05536-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-021-05536-4
pubmed: 34647154
Amsel G, Bosshard R, Zajde C. Shortening of detector signals with passive filters for pile-up reduction. Nucl Instrum Methods. 1969;71:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-554X(69)90075-5 .
doi: 10.1016/0029-554X(69)90075-5
EANM EARL. EARL PET/CT Accreditation user manual. version 4.2 (May2023) EARL. In: EARL Research for Life. European Association of Nuclear Medicine. 2023. https://earl.eanm.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/EARL_Manual_4.2.pdf . Accessed 16 Jul 2023.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA Standards publication NU 2-2018: performance measurements of positron emission tomographs (PET). Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2018.
Ross S. QClear White Paper. In: Motion free. En Mode Design. 2014. http://www.enmodedesign.com/MotionFree/QClear_White_Paper_DOC1474189REV_3_2014_06.pdf. Accessed 08 Mar 2023.
Kennedy JA, Palchan Hazan T, Keidar Z. Reconstruction parameter optimization for EARL criteria on an extended bore length solid-state digital-BGO PET/CT system [abstract]. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49(suppl 1):EP-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05924-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-05924-4
Boellaard R, O'Doherty MJ, Weber WA, et al. FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:181–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4
pubmed: 19915839
Mehranian A, Wollenweber SD, Walker MD, et al. Deep learning-based time-of-flight (ToF) image enhancement of non-ToF PET scans. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:3740–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05824-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-05824-7
pubmed: 35507059
pmcid: 9399038
Weiss Cohen M, Kennedy JA, Pirmisashvili A, Orlikov G. An automatic system for analyzing phantom images to determine the reliability of PET/SPECT cameras. Proc of ASME IDETC/CIE. 2015;3:V003T14A006. https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2015-46254 .
doi: 10.1115/DETC2015-46254
Rose A (1973) Vision: human and electronic. Plenum Press, New York
Zeimpekis KG, Kotasidis FA, Huellner M, Nemirovsky A, Kaufmann PA, Treyer V. NEMA NU 2-2018 performance evaluation of a new generation 30-cm axial field-of-view Discovery MI PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2022;49:3023–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-022-05751-7 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-022-05751-7
pubmed: 35284970
pmcid: 9250480
van Sluis J, de Jong J, Schaar J, et al. Performance characteristics of the digital Biograph Vision PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2019:601031–6. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.118.215418 .
Li X, Qi W, Miyahara M, Kolthammer J. Performance characterization of an SiPM-based time-of-flight Canon PET/CT scanner [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2020;61(suppl 1):14.
Tan H, Sui X, Yin H, et al. Total-body PET/CT using half-dose FDG and compared with conventional PET/CT using full-dose FDG in lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:1966–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-020-05091-4 .
doi: 10.1007/s00259-020-05091-4
pubmed: 33244618
Hu P, Zhang Y, Yu H, et al. Total-body
doi: 10.1007/s00259-021-05357-5
pubmed: 33866409
Tarantola G, Zito F, Gerundini P. PET instrumentation and reconstruction algorithms in whole-body applications. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:756–69.
pubmed: 12732678
Palchan-Hazan T, Kennedy JA, Keidar Z. Comparison of image quality metrics between solid-state digital-BGO PET/CT and time-of-flight LSO systems [abstract]. Radiological Society of North America 108th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting Program, 2022 Nov. 27 – Dec. 1; Chicago. W5A-SPPH7. https://www.rsna.org/-/media/Files/RSNA/Annual-meeting/Future-and-past-meetings/RSNA2022_Meeting_Program.ashx . Accessed 20 Aug 2023.
Lodge MA, Chaudhry MA, Wahl RL. Noise considerations for PET quantification using maximum and peak standardized uptake value. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1041–7.
doi: 10.2967/jnumed.111.101733
pubmed: 22627001
ACR. Nuclear Medicine and PET Accreditation Manual, Phantom Testing: PET (Revised 2-2-2023). In: Accreditation support. American College of Radiology. 2023. https://accreditationsupport.acr.org/support/solutions/articles/11000062800-phantom-testing-pet . Accessed 08 Mar 2023.
Surti S, Pantel AR, Karp JS. Total body PET: why, how, what for? IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020;4:283–92. https://doi.org/10.1109/trpms.2020.2985403 .
doi: 10.1109/trpms.2020.2985403
pubmed: 33134653
pmcid: 7595297