State-of-the-art of PET scanners for small animal and breast cancer imaging

Guerra, A. Del; Belcari, Nicola

doi:10.1016/j.nima.2007.06.037

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…FORE and 2D reconstruction methods appear to be a good compromise between overall image quality and reconstruction time: OSEM provides the largest PETforsmal l animals is used as a translational research tool between animal models and human clinical applications (1)(2)(3). The small dimensions of organs in animals such as rats or mice have prompted the development of dedicated PET scanners with high resolution and high sensitivity (4)(5)(6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

NEMA NU4-2008 Image Quality Performance Report for the microPET Focus 120 and for Various Transmission and Reconstruction Methods

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work aimed to evaluate the image quality and accuracy of attenuation and scatter corrections provided with the microPET Focus 120 scanner using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU4-2008 image quality phantom. Methods: Attenuation correction was obtained from transmission measurements using either a 68 Ge or a 57 Co point source. Fully corrected emission images were reconstructed using Fourier rebinning (FORE) and filtered backprojection (FBP). For attenuation data obtained with the 57 Co source, fully corrected emission images were also reconstructed using FORE and 2-dimensional (2D) ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM), 3-dimensional (3D) filtered backprojection (3DRP), 3D OSEM, and 3D maximum a posteriori methods. The mean activity, the coefficients of variation (COVs) of the uniform slices, the recovery coefficients (RCs) for hot rods, and the spillover ratio (SOR) for nonemitting water and air compartments were measured. Results: For 57 Co-based attenuation correction, the mean activity value differed by less than 3% from the true activity. Measuring the attenuation with 68 Ge resulted in lower reconstructed activity and higher COV. On the basis of 57 Co measurements, the SORs for air and water nonemitting compartments were the closest to zero for attenuation correction. The RC measured on emission images corrected for attenuation but not for scatter did not show any significant difference linked to the transmission method. However, higher RCs were noted for transmission measurement with 68 Ge in coincidence with windowing when emission data were corrected for attenuation and scatter. This resulted from a lower mean value in the uniform area. 2D and 3DRP reconstruction methods showed little effect on the mean activity value, whereas iterative 3D methods gave 7% higher values. Higher RCs were found with iterative reconstruction than with FBP and 3DRP. However, the SOR seemed to be optimal with FBP. SORs were higher with iterative methods and decreased with the number of iterations. Conclusion: For studies of small rodents with the Focus 120, 57 Co transmission seems to be the most suitable method for attenuation correction. FORE and 2D reconstruction methods appear to be a good compromise between overall image quality and reconstruction time: OSEM provides the largest contrasts, but FBP provides superior attenuation and scatter correction.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

NEMA NU4-2008 Image Quality Performance Report for the microPET Focus 120 and for Various Transmission and Reconstruction Methods

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These alternatives to PMTs address designs where one-on-one coupling is desired, layers of crystals and photosensors are used, there is a need for a general reduction in the volume of the photosensor, and applications such as PET detectors operate in a MRI system. More details are given in other review articles already referenced [6,12], but the list includes silicon PIN diodes, avalanche photodiodes, and Geiger-mode avalanche photodiodes (often referred to as a silicon photomultiplier). Avalanche photodiodes have relatively good gain (~ 10 2 -10 3 vs ~ 10 6 for PMTs) and can be fabricated as singlesensor devices, arrays, or as position-sensitive planar devices (position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes).…”

Section: Photodetectorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More details are given in other review articles already referenced [6,12], but the list includes silicon PIN diodes, avalanche photodiodes, and Geiger-mode avalanche photodiodes (often referred to as a silicon photomultiplier). Avalanche photodiodes have relatively good gain (~ 10 2 -10 3 vs ~ 10 6 for PMTs) and can be fabricated as singlesensor devices, arrays, or as position-sensitive planar devices (position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes). The latter devices use signals from the four corners of the device to determine the position of an event much like the technique used in the original block detectors.…”

Section: Photodetectorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the process of designing PET detectors for these tasks, many compromises must be made between the ultimate spatial resolution, sensitivity, factors affecting the final image signal-to-noise ratio, and the cost of production. This author and others have previously published review articles on PET detector and scanner technology [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. The goal of the present article is to review some of the challenges in PET detector development, focusing on scintillator-based designs because they are the dominant technology used in most PET scanners.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation