Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Clinical evaluation of TOF versus non-TOF on PET artifacts in simultaneous PET/MR: a dual centre experience.
Ter Voert, Edwin E G W; Veit-Haibach, Patrick; Ahn, Sangtae; Wiesinger, Florian; Khalighi, M Mehdi; Levin, Craig S; Iagaru, Andrei H; Zaharchuk, Greg; Huellner, Martin; Delso, Gaspar.
  • Ter Voert EEGW; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zurich, Switzerland. Edwin.terVoert@usz.ch.
  • Veit-Haibach P; University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. Edwin.terVoert@usz.ch.
  • Ahn S; Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Zurich, Rämistrasse 100, CH-8091, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Wiesinger F; University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Khalighi MM; Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
  • Levin CS; GE Global Research, Niskayuna, NY, USA.
  • Iagaru AH; GE Global Research, München, Germany.
  • Zaharchuk G; GE Healthcare, Waukesha, WI, USA.
  • Huellner M; Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
  • Delso G; Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging ; 44(7): 1223-1233, 2017 Jul.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28124091
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Our objective was to determine clinically the value of time-of-flight (TOF) information in reducing PET artifacts and improving PET image quality and accuracy in simultaneous TOF PET/MR scanning.

METHODS:

A total 65 patients who underwent a comparative scan in a simultaneous TOF PET/MR scanner were included. TOF and non-TOF PET images were reconstructed, clinically examined, compared and scored. PET imaging artifacts were categorized as large or small implant-related artifacts, as dental implant-related artifacts, and as implant-unrelated artifacts. Differences in image quality, especially those related to (implant) artifacts, were assessed using a scale ranging from 0 (no artifact) to 4 (severe artifact).

RESULTS:

A total of 87 image artifacts were found and evaluated. Four patients had large and eight patients small implant-related artifacts, 27 patients had dental implants/fillings, and 48 patients had implant-unrelated artifacts. The average score was 1.14 ± 0.82 for non-TOF PET images and 0.53 ± 0.66 for TOF images (p < 0.01) indicating that artifacts were less noticeable when TOF information was included.

CONCLUSION:

Our study indicates that PET image artifacts are significantly mitigated with integration of TOF information in simultaneous PET/MR. The impact is predominantly seen in patients with significant artifacts due to metal implants.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética / Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X / Artefactos / Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones / Imagen Multimodal Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador / Imagen por Resonancia Magnética / Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X / Artefactos / Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones / Imagen Multimodal Límite: Adult / Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Año: 2017 Tipo del documento: Article