PET/CT Biograph™ Sensation 16: Performance improvement using faster electronics

NuklearMedizin

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 126-133

  Martinez, Maria Jose ^a   Bercier, Y ^b   Schwaiger, M ^a   Ziegler, S I ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^b CPS Innovations   (United States)

Author keywords

NEMA NU 2 2001; Noise equivalent count rate; PET performance; PET CT; Pico 3D electronics

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT; ELECTRONICS; IMAGE QUALITY; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; OPTICAL RESOLUTION; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 33745893221     PISSN: 00295566     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1625926     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Badawi RD, Domigan P, Johnson O et al. Countrate dependent event mispositioning and NEC in PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2004; 51: 41-5.
2. Barrett HH, Wilson DW, Tsui BMW. Noise properties of the EM algorithm: I. Theory Phys Med Biol 1994; 39: 833-46.
3. Bettinardi V, Danna M, Savi A et al. Performance evaluation of the new whole-body PET/CT scanner: Discovery ST. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Ima 2004; 31: 867-81.
4. Boellaard R, vanLingen A, Lammertsma AA. Experimental and clinical evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) in dynamic PET: Quantitative characteristics and effects on kinetic modeling. J Nucl Med 2001; 42: 808-17.
5. Daube-Witherspoon ME, Karp JS, Casey ME et al. PET Performance measurements using the NEMA NU 2-2001 standard. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1498-509.
6. Erdi YE, Nehmeh SA, Mulnix T et al. PET Performance measurements for an LSO-based combined PET/CT scanner using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2001 Standard. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 814-21.
7. Eriksson LE, Watson CC, Wienhard K et al. The ECAT HRRT: An example of NEMA scatter estimation issues for LSO based PET systems. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2005; 52: 90-4.
8. Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement. International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 1995.
9. Herzog H, Tellmann L, Hocke C et al. NEMA NU2-2001 guided performance evaluation of four Siemens ECAT PET-scanners. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2004; 51: 2662-9.
10. Kim JS, Lee JS, Lee DS et al. Performance evaluation of Philips GEMINI PET/CT using NEMA NU-2001 STANDARD, J. Nucl Med 2004; 45(suppl): A101P.
11. Lodge MA, Dilsizian V, Line BR. Performance assessment of the Philips Gemini PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(suppl): A425P.
12. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA Standards Publication NU 2-2001: Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2001.
13. Ohnesorge B, Flohr T, Schwarz K et al. Efficient correction for CT image artifacts caused by objects extending outside the scan field of view. Med Phys 2000; 27: 39-46.
14. Puterbaugh KC, Breeding JE, Musrock MS et al. Performance comparison of a current LSO PET scanner versus the same scanner with upgraded electronics. IEEE Nuc Sci Symp Conf Rec 2003; 3: 1932-5.
15. Watson CC, Casey ME, Eriksson L et al. NEMA NU 2 performance tests for scanners with intrinsic radioactivity. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 822-6.
16. Wilson DW, Tsui BMW, Barrett HH. Noise properties of the EM algorithm: II. Monte Carlo simu-lations. Phys Med Biol 1994; 39: 847-71.