NEMA NU 4-2008 Comparison of Preclinical PET Imaging Systems

Goertzen, Andrew L.; Bao, Qinan; Bergeron, Mélanie; Blankemeyer, Eric; Blinder, Stephan; Canadas, M.; Chatziioannou, Arion F.; Dinelle, Katherine; Elhami, Esmat; Jans, Hans-Soenke; Lage, Eduardo; Lecomte, Roger; Sossi, Vesna; Surti, Suleman; Tai, Yu‐Chong; Vaquero, J.J.; Vicente, E.; Williams, Darin A.; Laforest, Richard

doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.099382

Cited by 206 publications

(235 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

197

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 2 summarizes the main system specifications. A complete description of all the available preclinical hybrid systems is outside the focus of this review paper, please see [46,[61][62][63][64][65] for details.…”

Section: Preclinical Hybrid Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

State-of-the-art patient management frequently requires the use of non-invasive imaging methods to assess the anatomy, function or molecular-biological conditions of patients or study subjects. Such imaging methods can be singular, providing either anatomical or molecular information, or they can be combined, thus, providing "anato-metabolic" information. Hybrid imaging denotes image acquisitions on systems that physically combine complementary imaging modalities for an improved diagnostic accuracy and confidence as well as for increased patient comfort. The physical combination of formerly independent imaging modalities was driven by leading innovators in the field of clinical research and benefited from technological advances that permitted the operation of PET and MR in close physical proximity, for example. This review covers milestones of the development of various hybrid imaging systems for use in clinical practice and small-animal research. Special attention is given to technological advances that helped the adoption of hybrid imaging, as well as to introducing methodological concepts that benefit from the availability of complementary anatomical and biological information, such as new types of image reconstruction and data correction schemes. The ultimate goal of hybrid imaging is to provide useful, complementary and quantitative information during patient work-up. Hybrid imaging also opens the door to multi-parametric assessment of diseases, which will help us better understand the causes of various diseases that currently contribute to a large fraction of healthcare costs.

show abstract

Section: Preclinical Hybrid Imagingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mouse positioning may be further optimized in the future using a new mouse bed for more highly focused (and hence sensitive) imaging of the brain or its substructures. Developments in coincidence PET have also taken place since the manufacture of the Focus120, but performance gains have been modest and spatial resolution remains inferior to VECTor (20).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance Assessment of a Preclinical PET Scanner with Pinhole Collimation by Comparison to a Coincidence-Based Small-Animal PET Scanner

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PET imaging of rodents is increasingly used in preclinical research, but its utility is limited by spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio of the images. A recently developed preclinical PET system uses a clustered-pinhole collimator, enabling high-resolution, simultaneous imaging of PET and SPECT tracers. Pinhole collimation strongly departs from traditional electronic collimation achieved via coincidence detection in PET. We investigated the potential of such a design by direct comparison to a traditional PET scanner. Methods: Two small-animal PET scanners, 1 with electronic collimation and 1 with physical collimation using clustered pinholes, were used to acquire data from Jaszczak (hot rod) and uniform phantoms. Mouse brain imaging using 18 F-FDG PET was performed on each system and compared with quantitative ex vivo autoradiography as a gold standard. Bone imaging using 18 F-NaF allowed comparison of imaging in the mouse body. Images were visually and quantitatively compared using measures of contrast and noise. Results: Pinhole PET resolved the smallest rods (diameter, 0.85 mm) in the Jaszczak phantom, whereas the coincidence system resolved 1.1-mm-diameter rods. Contrast-to-noise ratios were better for pinhole PET when imaging small rods (,1.1 mm) for a wide range of activity levels, but this reversed for larger rods. Image uniformity on the coincidence system (,3%) was superior to that on the pinhole system (5%). The high 18 F-FDG uptake in the striatum of the mouse brain was fully resolved using the pinhole system, with contrast to nearby regions equaling that from autoradiography; a lower contrast was found using the coincidence PET system. For shortduration images (low-count), the coincidence system was superior. Conclusion: In the cases for which small regions need to be resolved in scans with reasonably high activity or reasonably long scan times, a first-generation clustered-pinhole system can provide image quality in terms of resolution, contrast, and the contrast-to-noise ratio superior to a traditional PET system. Smal l-animal PET is an increasingly important tool in biomedical research. A recent development in scanner technology has been the introduction of a focused, clustered-pinhole collimator that enables simultaneous high-spatial-resolution PET and SPECT imaging. Physical collimation of the 511-keV photons produced by positron-electron annihilation, using clustered pinholes, is a substantial change in scanner design as compared with electronic collimation via coincidence detection. Clustered pinholes can offer improved spatial resolution (1) in rodent images, despite a low fraction of single 511-keV photons being detected as compared with the fraction of detected photon pairs in traditional PET. Such scanners are likely suited to different applications. The commonly encountered sensitivity-resolution trade-off has been investigated previously: it has been known for several decades that an improvement in image quality can be achieved via a gain in spatial resolution, even if this gain...

show abstract

“…Recently, Goetzen et al [14] provided a summary of NEMA results for most commercially available pre-clinical PET scanners. This summary, however, does not include the 1-ring Bruker Albira PET [11].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, since its publication, many systems were evaluated based on this standard. Results for most of the commercially available devices were reviewed and compared by Goertzen et al [14]. The one-ring Albira PET results were published before [11] and recently Spinks et al published evaluation of the triple-ring configuration, however, the latter followed custom protocol and not NEMA guidelines.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

NEMA NU4-2008 Performance Evaluation of Albira: A Two-Ring Small-Animal PET System Using Continuous LYSO Crystals

Pajak¹,

Völgyes²,

Pimlott³

et al. 2016

MEDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Goals: This paper presents the performance review based on a dual-ring Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanner being a part of Bruker Albira: a multi-modal small-animal imaging platform. Each ring of Albira PET contains eight detectors arranged as octagon, and each detector is built using a single continuous lutetium-yttrium oxyorthosilicate crystal and multi-anode photo multiplier tube. In two-ring configuration, the scanner covers 94.4 mm in axial-and 80´80 mm in trans-axial direction, which is sufficient to acquire images of small animals (e.g. mice) without the need of moving the animal bed during the scan. Methods:All measurements and majority of data processing were performed according to the NEMA NU4-2008 standard with one exception. Due to the scanner geometry, the spatial resolution test was reconstructed using iterative algorithm instead of the analytical one. The main performance characteristics were compared with those of the other PET sub-systems of tri-modal smallanimal scanners. Results:The measured spatial resolution at the centre of the axial field of view in radial, tangential and axial directions was 1.72, 1.70 and 2.45 mm, respectively. The scatter fraction for the mouse-like phantom was 9.8% and for the rat-like phantom, 21.8%. The maximum absolute sensitivity was 5.30%. Finally, the recovery co-efficients for 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 mm diameter rods in image quality phantom were: 0.90, 0.77, 0.66, 0.30 and 0.05, respectively. Conclusion:The Bruker Albira is a versatile small-animal multi-modal device that can be used for variety of studies. Overall the PET sub-system provides a good spatial resolution coupled with better-than average sensitivity and the ability to produce good quality animal images when administering low activities.

show abstract

NEMA NU 4-2008 Comparison of Preclinical PET Imaging Systems

Cited by 206 publications

References 27 publications

Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing

Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing

Performance Assessment of a Preclinical PET Scanner with Pinhole Collimation by Comparison to a Coincidence-Based Small-Animal PET Scanner

NEMA NU4-2008 Performance Evaluation of Albira: A Two-Ring Small-Animal PET System Using Continuous LYSO Crystals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About