Evaluation of PET Scanner Performance in PET/MR and PET/CT Systems: NEMA Tests

Article English OPEN
Mustafa Demir ; Türkay Toklu ; Mohammad Abuqbeitah ; Hüseyin Çetin ; H. Sezer Sezgin ; Nami Yeyin ; Kerim Sönmezoğlu (2018)
  • Publisher: Galenos Yayinevi
  • Journal: Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy, volume 27, issue 1, pages 10-18 (issn: 2146-1414, eissn: 2147-1959)
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.4274/mirt.97659, pmc: PMC5790967
  • Subject: Original Article | PET/CT | R | NEMA tests | quality control | R5-920 | PET/MR | Medicine (General) | Medicine | R895-920 | Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine

Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the performance of positron emission tomography (PET) component of PET/computed tomography (CT) with new emerging PET/magnetic resonance (MR) of the same vendor. Methods: According to National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU2-07, five separate experimental tests were performed to evaluate the performance of PET scanner of General Electric GE company; SIGNATM model PET/MR and GE Discovery 710 model PET/CT. The main investigated aspects were spatial resolution, sensitivity, scatter fraction, count rate performance, image quality, count loss and random events correction accuracy. Results: The findings of this study demonstrated superior sensitivity (~ 4 folds) of PET scanner in PET/MR compared to PET/CT system. Image quality test exhibited higher contrast in PET/MR (~ 9%) compared with PET/CT. The scatter fraction of PET/MR was 43.4% at noise equivalent count rate (NECR) peak of 218 kcps and the corresponding activity concentration was 17.7 kBq/cc. Whereas the scatter fraction of PET/CT was found as 39.2% at NECR peak of 72 kcps and activity concentration of 24.3 kBq/cc. The percentage error of the random event correction accuracy was 3.4% and 3.1% in PET/MR and PET/CT, respectively. Conclusion: It was concluded that PET/MR system is about 4 times more sensitive than PET/CT, and the contrast of hot lesions in PET/MR was ~ 9% higher than PET/CT. These outcomes also emphasize the possibility to achieve excellent clinical PET images with low administered dose and/or a short acquisition time in PET/MR.
Share - Bookmark