Quantification accuracy of neuro-oncology PET data as a function of emission scan duration in PET/MR compared to PET/CT.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate and compare the effect of reduced acquisition time, as a surrogate of injected activity, on the PET quantification accuracy in PET/CT and PET/MR imaging. METHODS: Twenty min 18F-FDG phantom measurements and 10min 18F-FET brain scans were acquired in a Biograph-True-Point-True-View PET/CT (n=8) and a Biograph mMR PET/MR (n=16). Listmode data were repeatedly split into frames of 1min to 10min length and reconstructed using two different reconstruction settings of a 3D-OSEM algorithm: with post-filtering ("OSEM"), and without post-filtering but with resolution recovery ("PSF"). Recovery coefficients (RCmax, RCA50) and standard uptake values (SUVmax, SUVA50) were evaluated. RESULTS: RCmax (phantom) and SUVmax (patients) increased significantly when reducing the frame duration. Significantly lower deviations were observed for RCA50 and SUVA50, respectively, making them more appropriate to compare PET studies at different number of counts. No statistical significant differences were observed when using post-filtering and reducing the frame time to 4min (RCA50, reference 20min, phantom) and to 3min (SUVA50, reference 10min, patients). CONCLUSIONS: For hybrid aminoacid brain imaging, frame duration (or injected activity) can potentially be reduced to 30% of the standard used in clinical routine without significant changes on the quantification accuracy of the PET images if adequate reconstruction settings and quantitative measures are used. Frame times below 4min in the NEMA phantom are not advisable to obtain quantitative and reproducible measures.

A study of SPECT/CT camera stability for quantitative imaging.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was twofold: to evaluate the quantitative stability of a SPECT/CT gamma camera over time and to determine if daily flood acquisitions can reliably serve as calibration factors for quantitative SPECT. Using a cylindrical water phantom filled with measured amounts of (99m)Tc, factors were calculated to convert counts/cc to activity/cps. Measurements were made over an 18-month period. System sensitivity data calculated from (57)Co daily quality assurance (DQA) flood acquisitions were then compared to the (99m)Tc calibration factors to determine the relationship of the factors. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation is 2.7 % for the (99m)Tc cylinder conversion factors and 2.6 % for the (57)Co DQA flood data. The greatest difference between the cylinder conversion factors and the flood data is less than 3 %. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results, the camera was stable within 3 % over an 18-month time period. The daily flood source acquisitions can be a reliable source for tracking camera stability and may provide information on updating the calibration factor for quantitative imaging.