PET/MR imaging: Technical aspects and potential clinical applications

Radiology

Volumn 267, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 26-44

  Torigian, Drew A ^a   Zaidi, Habib ^b,c,d   Kwee, Thomas C ^e   Saboury, Babak ^a   Udupa, Jayaram K ^a   Cho, Zang Hee ^f   Alavi, Abass ^a  

^a HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

^e UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^f Gachon University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHOLINE C 11; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE; GADOXETIC ACID; HYDROXYEPHEDRINE C 11; IODINATED CONTRAST MEDIUM; PHENYLALANINE GA 68; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT; TETRAXETAN[1 PHEYLALANINE] OCTREOTIDE[3 TYROSINE] GA 68; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ARTICLE; BRAIN TUMOR; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DIFFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; ELASTOGRAPHY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; IMAGING SYSTEM; IONIZING RADIATION; ISOTOPE TRACING; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SCANNER; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE SPECTROSCOPY; OSTEOMYELITIS; PERFUSION WEIGHTED IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

CONTRAST MEDIA; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 84875473801     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13121038     Document Type: Article

References (136)

1. Zaidi H, Mawlawi O, Orton CG. Point/ counterpoint. Simultaneous PET/MR will replace PET/CT as the molecular multimodality imaging platform of choice. Med Phys 2007;34(5):1525-1528.
2. Zaidi H, Montandon ML, Alavi A. The clinical role of fusion imaging using PET, CT, and MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2010;18(1):133-149.
3. Pietrzyk U. Does PET/CT render software fusion obsolete? Nuklearmedizin 2005; 44(Suppl 1):S13-S17.
4. Weigert M, Pietrzyk U, Müller S, Palm C, Beyer T. Whole-body PET/CT imaging: combining software- and hardware-based co-registration. Z Med Phys 2008;18(1):59- 66.
5. Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE. Respiratory motion in positron emission tomography/computed tomography: a review. Semin Nucl Med 2008;38(3):167-176.
6. Slomka PJ, Baum RP. Multimodality image registration with software: state-of-the-art. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009; 36(Suppl 1):S44-S55.
7. Klein S, Staring M, Murphy K, Viergever MA, Pluim JPW. elastix: a toolbox for intensity- based medical image registration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2010;29(1):196-205.
8. Hill DL, Batchelor PG, Holden M, Hawkes DJ. Medical image registration. Phys Med Biol 2001;46(3):R1-R45.
9. Maes F, Vandermeulen D, Suetens P. Medical image registration using mutual information. Proc IEEE 2003;91(10):1699-1722.
10. Hutton BF, Braun M. Software for image registration: algorithms, accuracy, efficacy. Semin Nucl Med 2003;33(3):180-192.
11. Hill A, Cootes TF, Taylor CJ, Lindley K. Medical image interpretation: a generic approach using deformable templates. Med Inform (Lond) 1994;19(1):47-59.
12. Maes F, Collignon A, Vandermeulen D, Marchal G, Suetens P. Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16(2):187-198.
13. Lau YH, Braun M, Hutton BF. Non-rigid image registration using a median-filtered coarse-to-fine displacement field and a symmetric correlation ratio. Phys Med Biol 2001;46(4):1297-1319.
14. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(5):571-578.
15. Weber WA. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med 2009;50(Suppl 1): 1S-10S.
16. De Moor K, Nuyts J, Plessers L, Stroobants S, Maes F, Dupont P. Non-rigid registration with position dependent rigidity for whole body PET follow-up studies. Proc IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference 2006; 3502-3506.
17. Zaidi H, Ojha N, Morich M, et al. Design and performance evaluation of a wholebody Ingenuity TF PET-MRI system. Phys Med Biol 2011;56(10):3091-3106.
18. Veit-Haibach P, Kuhn FP, Wiesinger F, Delso G, von Schulthess G. PET-MR imaging using a tri-modality PET/CT-MR system with a dedicated shuttle in clinical routine. MAGMA 2012 Oct 9. [Epub ahead of print].
19. Cho ZH, Son YD, Kim HK, et al. A fusion PET-MRI system with a high-resolution research tomograph-PET and ultra-high field 7.0 T-MRI for the molecular-genetic imaging of the brain. Proteomics 2008;8(6): 1302-1323.
20. Zaidi H, Del Guerra A. An outlook on future design of hybrid PET/MRI systems. Med Phys 2011;38(10):5667-5689.
21. Klose U. In vivo proton spectroscopy in presence of eddy currents. Magn Reson Med 1990;14(1):26-30.
22. Camacho CR, Plewes DB, Henkelman RM. Nonsusceptibility artifacts due to metallic objects in MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 1995;5(1):75-88.
23. Delso G, Fürst S, Jakoby B, et al. Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med 2011;52(12):1914-1922.
24. Christensen NL, Hammer BE, Heil BG, Fetterly K. Positron emission tomography within a magnetic field using photomultiplier tubes and lightguides. Phys Med Biol 1995;40(4):691-697.
25. Catana C, Wu Y, Judenhofer MS, Qi J, Pichler BJ, Cherry SR. Simultaneous acquisition of multislice PET and MR images: initial results with a MR-compatible PET scanner. J Nucl Med 2006;47(12):1968- 1976.
26. Lucas AJ, Hawkes RC, Ansorge RE, et al. Development of a combined microPET-MR system. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2006; 5(4):337-341.
27. Kim JS, Lee JS, Im KC, et al. Performance measurement of the microPET focus 120 scanner. J Nucl Med 2007;48(9):1527- 1535.
28. Shao Y, Cherry SR, Farahani K, et al. Simultaneous PET and MR imaging. Phys Med Biol 1997;42(10):1965-1970.
29. Pichler B, Lorenz E, Mirzoyan R, Pimpl W, Roder F, Schwaiger M. Performance tests of a LSO-APD PET module in a 9.4 Tesla magnet. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record 1997; 1237-1239.
30. Marsden PK, Strul D, Keevil SF, Williams SC, Cash D. Simultaneous PET and NMR. Br J Radiol 2002;75(Spec No):S53-S59.
31. Cherry SR. Multimodality in vivo imaging systems: twice the power or double the trouble? Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2006;8: 35-62.
32. Cherry SR, Louie AY, Jacobs RE. The Integration of Positron Emission Tomography with Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Proc IEEE 2008;96(3):416-438.
33. Pichler BJ, Judenhofer MS, Catana C, et al. Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2006;47(4): 639-647.
34. Schlyer D, Vaska P, Tomasi D, et al. A simultaneous PET/MRI scanner based on the RatCAP in small animals. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec 2007; 3256-3259.
35. Woody C, Schlyer D, Vaska P, et al. Preliminary studies of a simultaneous PET/MRI scanner based on the RatCAP small animal tomograph. Nucl Instr Meth A. 2007; 571(1-2):102-105.
36. Judenhofer MS, Catana C, Swann BK, et al. PET/MR images acquired with a compact MR-compatible PET detector in a 7-T magnet. Radiology 2007;244(3):807- 814.
37. Judenhofer MS, Wehrl HF, Newport DF, et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging. Nat Med 2008;14(4):459-465.
38. Ravindranath B, Junnarkar SS, Purschke ML, et al. Results from prototype II of the BNL simultaneous PET-MRI dedicated breast scanner. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2009; 3315- 3317.
39. Pichler BJ, Kolb A, Nägele T, Schlemmer HP. PET/MRI: paving the way for the next generation of clinical multimodality imaging applications. J Nucl Med 2010;51(3): 333-336.
40. Kang J, Choi Y, Hong KJ, et al. A feasibility study of photosensor charge signal transmission to preamplifier using long cable for development of hybrid PET-MRI. Med Phys 2010;37(11):5655-5664.
41. Wu Y, Catana C, Farrell R, et al. PET performance evaluation of an MR-compatible PET insert. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2009; 56(3):574-580.
42. Schlemmer HP, Pichler BJ, Schmand M, et al. Simultaneous MR/PET imaging of the human brain: feasibility study. Radiology 2008;248(3):1028-1035.
43. Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS, Thielscher A, Martirosian P, Schick F, Pichler BJ. Assessment of MR compatibility of a PET insert developed for simultaneous multiparametric PET/MR imaging on an animal system operating at 7 T. Magn Reson Med 2011; 65(1):269-279.
44. Wehrl HF, Judenhofer MS, Wiehr S, Pichler BJ. Pre-clinical PET/MR: technological advances and new perspectives in biomedical research. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36(Suppl 1):S56-S68.
45. Fontaine R, Belanger F, Viscogliosi N, et al. The hardware and signal processing architecture of LabPET, a small animal APDbased digital PET scanner. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2009;56(1):3-9.
46. Drzezga A, Souvatzoglou M, Eiber M, et al. First clinical experience with integrated whole-body PET/MR: comparison to PET/ CT in patients with oncologic diagnoses. J Nucl Med 2012;53(6):845-855.
47. Otte AN, Barral J, Dolgoshein B, et al. A test of silicon photomultipliers as readout for PET. Nucl Instr Meth A. 2005;545(3): 705-715.
48. Buzhan P, Dolgoshein B, Ilyin A, et al. An advanced study of silicon photomultiplier. ICFA Instrum Bull 2001;23:28-42.
49. Herbert DJ, Saveliev V, Belcari N, D'Ascenzo N, Del Guerra A, Golovin A. First results of scintillator readout with silicon photomultiplier. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2006;53(1):389-394.
50. Piemonte C, Battiston R, Boscardin M, et al. New results on the characterization of ITC-irst Silicon photomultipliers. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2006; 1566-1569.
51. Llosa G, Belcari N, Bisogni MG, et al. Silicon photomultipliers and SiPM matrices as photodetectors in nuclear medicine. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2007; 3220-3223.
52. Renker D, Lorenz E. Advances in solid state photon detectors. J Instr. 2009;4(04): P04004.
53. Conti M. Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(6): 1147-1157.
54. Hawkes R, Lucas A, Stevick J, et al. Silicon photomultiplier performance tests in magnetic resonance pulsed fields. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record 2007; 3400-3403.
55. Degenhardt C, Prescher G, Frach T, et al. The digital silicon photomultiplier - A novel sensor for the detection of scintillation light. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC) 2009; 2383-2386.
56. Frach T, Prescher G, Degenhardt C, de Gruyter R, Schmitz A, Ballizany R. The digital silicon photomultiplier - Principle of operation and intrinsic detector performance. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC) 2009; 1959-1965.
57. von Schulthess GK, Burger C. Integrating imaging modalities: what makes sense from a workflow perspective? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2010;37(5):980-990.
58. Martinez-Möller A, Eiber M, Nekolla SG, et al. Workflow and scan protocol considerations for integrated whole-body PET/MRI in oncology. J Nucl Med 2012;53(9): 1415-1426.
59. Chun SY, Reese TG, Ouyang J, et al. MRIbased nonrigid motion correction in simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2012;53(8): 1284-1291.
60. Kwee TC, Basu S, Saboury B, Alavi A, Torigian DA. Functional oncoimaging techniques with potential clinical applications. Front Biosci (Elite Ed) 2012;4: 1081-1096.
61. Shamim SA, Torigian DA, Kumar R. PET, PET/CT, and PET/MRI assessment of breast cancer. PET Clin 2008;3(3):381-393.
62. Hustinx R, Torigian DA, Namur G. Complementary assessment of abdominopelvic disorders with PET/CT and MRI. PET Clin 2008;3(3):435-449.
63. Katz S, Ferrara T, Alavi A, Torigian DA. PET, CT, and MRI for assessment of thoracic malignancy: structure meets function. PET Clin 2008;3(3):395-410.
64. Chen K, Blebea J, Laredo JD, Chen W, Alavi A, Torigian DA. Evaluation of musculoskeleta disorders with PET, PET/CT, and PET/MRI. PET Clin 2008;3(3):451-465.
65. Goldberg MF, Chawla S, Alavi A, Torigian DA,Melhem ER. PET and MRI of brain tumors. PET Clin 2008;3(3):293-315.
66. Antoch G, Bockisch A. Combined PET/ MRI: a new dimension in whole-body oncology imaging? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36(Suppl 1):S113-S120.
67. Nakajo K, Tatsumi M, Inoue A, et al. Diagnostic performance of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging fusion images of gynecological malignant tumors: comparison with positron emission tomography/computed tomography. Jpn J Radiol 2010; 28(2):95-100.
68. Torigian DA, Huang SS, Houseni M, Alavi A.Functional imaging of cancer with emphasis on molecular techniques. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57(4):206-224.
69. Kwee TC, Basu S, Torigian DA, Saboury B, Alavi A. Defining the role of modern imaging techniques in assessing lymph nodes for metastasis in cancer: evolving contribution of PET in this setting. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(7):1353-1366.
70. Boss A, Stegger L, Bisdas S, et al. Feasibility of simultaneous PET/MR imaging in the head and upper neck area. Eur Radiol 2011;21(7):1439-1446.
71. Huang SH, Chien CY, Lin WC, et al. A comparative study of fused FDG PET/MRI, PET/CT, MRI, and CT imaging for assessing surrounding tissue invasion of advanced buccal squamous cell carcinoma. Clin Nucl Med 2011;36(7):518-525.
72. Nagarajah J, Jentzen W, Hartung V, et al. Diagnosis and dosimetry in differentiated thyroid carcinoma using 124I PET: comparison of PET/MRI vs PET/CT of the neck. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(10): 1862-1868.
73. Tatsumi M, Isohashi K, Onishi H, et al. 18F-FDG PET/MRI fusion in characterizing pancreatic tumors: comparison to PET/CT. Int J Clin Oncol 2011;16(4):408-415.
74. Kim SK, Choi HJ, Park SY, et al. Additional value of MR/PET fusion compared with PET/CT in the detection of lymph node metastases in cervical cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 2009;45(12):2103-2109.
75. Donati OF, Hany TF, Reiner CS, et al. Value of retrospective fusion of PET and MR images in detection of hepatic metastases: comparison with 18F-FDG PET/CT and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI. J Nucl Med 2010;51(5):692-699.
76. Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA 2003;290(24):3199-3206.
77. Torigian DA, Lopez RF, Alapati S, et al. Feasibility and performance of novel software to quantify metabolically active volumes and 3D partial volume corrected SUV and metabolic volumetric products of spinal bone marrow metastases on 18F-FDGPET/ CT. Hell J Nucl Med 2011;14(1):8-14.
78. Kwee TC, Basu S, Saboury B, Ambrosini V, Torigian DA, Alavi A. A new dimension of FDG-PET interpretation: assessment of tumor biology. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011;38(6):1158-1170.
79. Kwee TC, Takahara T, Ochiai R, et al. Whole-body diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Radiol 2009; 70(3):409-417.
80. Yong TW, Yuan ZZ, Jun Z, Lin Z, He WZ, Juanqi Z. Sensitivity of PET/MR images in liver metastases from colorectal carcinoma. Hell J Nucl Med 2011;14(3):264-268.
81. Low RN, Gurney J. Diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI) in the oncology patient: value of breathhold DWI compared to unenhanced and gadolinium-enhanced MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 2007;25(4):848-858.
82. Tan CH, Wang J, Kundra V. Diffusion weighted imaging in prostate cancer. Eur Radiol 2011;21(3):593-603.
83. Laurent V, Trausch G, Bruot O, Olivier P, Felblinger J, Régent D. Comparative study of two whole-body imaging techniques in the case of melanoma metastases: advantages of multi-contrast MRI examination including a diffusion-weighted sequence in comparison with PET-CT. Eur J Radiol 2010;75(3):376-383.
84. Kim YN, Yi CA, Lee KS, et al. A proposal for combined MRI and PET/CT interpretation criteria for preoperative nodal staging in non-small-cell lung cancer. Eur Radiol 2012;22(7):1537-1546.
85. Park SH, Moon WK, Cho N, et al. Comparison of diffusion-weighted MR imaging and FDG PET/CT to predict pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol 2012;22(1):18-25.
86. Park H, Wood D, Hussain H, et al. Introducing parametric fusion PET/MRI of primary prostate cancer. J Nucl Med 2012; 53(4):546-551.
87. Wolf W. The unique potential for noninvasive imaging in modernizing drug development and in transforming therapeutics: PET/ MRI/MRS. Pharm Res 2011;28(3):490-493.
88. Benveniste H, Fowler JS, Rooney WD, et al. Maternal-fetal in vivo imaging: a combined PET and MRI study. J Nucl Med 2003;44(9):1522-1530.
89. Alessio AM, Kinahan PE. CT protocol selection in PET-CT imaging. http://www.imagewisely.org/Imaging-Professionals/ Nuclear-Medicine/Articles/CT- Protocol- Selection. 2012:1-4.
90. Akin EA, Torigian DA. Considerations regarding radiation exposure in performing FDG-PET-CT. http://www.imagewisely.org/ Imaging-Professionals/ Nuclear-Medicine/Articles/Considerations. 2012:1-7.
91. Musiek ES, Torigian DA, Newberg AB. Investigation of non-neoplastic neurologic disorders with PET and MRI. PET Clin 2008;3(3):317-334.
92. Heiss WD. The potential of PET/MR for brain imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36(Suppl 1):S105-S112.
93. Schlemmer HP, Pichler BJ, Krieg R, Heiss WD. An integrated MR/PET system: prospective applications. Abdom Imaging 2009; 34(6):668-674.
94. Boss A, Bisdas S, Kolb A, et al. Hybrid PET/MRI of intracranial masses: initial experiences and comparison to PET/CT. J Nucl Med 2010;51(8):1198-1205.
95. Cho ZH, Son YD, Kim HK, et al. Substructural hippocampal glucose metabolism observed on PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2010; 51(10):1545-1548.
96. Basu S, Zaidi H, Houseni M, et al. Novel quantitative techniques for assessing regional and global function and structure based on modern imaging modalities: implications for normal variation, aging and diseased states. Semin Nucl Med 2007; 37(3):223-239.
97. Alavi A, Newberg AB, Souder E, Berlin JA. Quantitative analysis of PET and MRI data in normal aging and Alzheimer's disease: atrophy weighted total brain metabolism and absolute whole brain metabolism as reliable discriminators. J Nucl Med 1993; 34(10):1681-1687.
98. Schwenzer NF, Stegger L, Bisdas S, et al. Simultaneous PET/MR imaging in a human brain PET/MR system in 50 patients - current state of image quality. Eur J Radiol 2012;81(11):3472-3478.
99. Cho ZH, Son YD, Kim HK, et al. Observation of glucose metabolism in the thalamic nuclei by fusion PET/MRI. J Nucl Med 2011;52(3):401-404.
100. Son YD, Cho ZH, Kim HK, et al. Glucose metabolism of the midline nuclei raphe in the brainstem observed by PET-MRI fusion imaging. Neuroimage 2012;59(2):1094- 1097.
101. Naidich TP, Duvernoy HM, Delman BN, Sorensen AG, Kollias SS, Haacke EM. Duvernoy's atlas of the human brain stem and cerebellum. High-field MRI: surface anatomy, internal structure, vascularization and 3D sectional anatomy. Vienna, Austria: Springer-Verlag, 2009.
102. Eggers C, Szelies B, Bauer B, et al. Imaging ofacetylcholine esterase activity in brainstem nuclei involved in regulation of sleep and wakefulness. Eur J Neurol 2007; 14(6):690-693.
103. Lee KK, Salamon N. [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose- positron-emission tomography and MR imaging coregistration for presurgical evaluation of medically refractory epilepsy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009; 30(10):1811-1816.
104. Salamon N, Kung J, Shaw SJ, et al. FDGPET/ MRI coregistration improves detection of cortical dysplasia in patients with epilepsy. Neurology 2008;71(20):1594- 1601.
105. Cruz LC Jr, Sorensen AG. Diffusion tensor magnetic resonance imaging of brain tumors. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2006;14(2):183-202.
106. Boss A, Kolb A, Hofmann M, et al. Diffusion tensor imaging in a human PET/MR hybrid system. Invest Radiol 2010; 45(5):270-274.
107. Vlieger EJ, Majoie CB, Leenstra S, Den Heeten GJ. Functional magnetic resonance imaging for neurosurgical planning in neurooncology. Eur Radiol 2004;14(7): 1143-1153.
108. Ogawa S, Lee TM, Kay AR, Tank DW. Brain magnetic resonance imaging with contrast dependent on blood oxygenation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1990;87(24):9868- 9872.
109. Behera D, Jacobs KE, Behera S, Rosenberg J,Biswal S. (18)F-FDG PET/MRI can be used to identify injured peripheral nerves in a model of neuropathic pain. J Nucl Med 2011;52(8):1308-1312.
110. Takalkar A, Chen W, Desjardins B, Alavi A, Torigian DA. Cardiovascular imaging with PET, CT, and MRI. PET Clin 2008; 3(3):411-434.
111. Bengel FM, Ueberfuhr P, Schiepel N, Nekolla SG, Reichart B, Schwaiger M. Myocardial efficiency and sympathetic reinnervation after orthotopic heart transplantation: a noninvasive study with positron emission tomography. Circulation 2001; 103(14):1881-1886.
112. Syed IS, Feng D, Harris SR, et al. MR imaging of cardiac masses. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2008;16(2):137-164, vii.
113. Probst S, Seltzer A, Spieler B, Chachoua A, Friedman K. The appearance of cardiac metastasis from squamous cell carcinoma of the lung on F-18 FDG PET/CT and post hoc PET/MRI. Clin Nucl Med 2011;36(4): 311-312.
114. Higuchi T, Anton M, Dumler K, et al. Combined reporter gene PET and iron oxide MRI for monitoring survival and localization of transplanted cells in the rat heart. J Nucl Med 2009;50(7):1088-1094.
115. Bural GG, Torigian DA, Chamroonrat W, et al. Quantitative assessment of the atherosclerotic burden of the aorta by combined FDG-PET and CT image analysis: a new concept. Nucl Med Biol 2006;33(8):1037- 1043.
116. Tahara N, Kai H, Ishibashi M, et al. Simvastatin attenuates plaque inflammation: evaluation by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48(9):1825-1831.
117. Fayad ZA, Mani V, Woodward M, et al. Safety and efficacy of dalcetrapib on atherosclerotic disease using novel non-invasive multimodality imaging (dal-PLAQUE): a randomised clinical trial. Lancet 2011; 378(9802):1547-1559.
118. Basu S, Chryssikos T, Houseni M, et al. Potential role of FDG PET in the setting of diabetic neuro-osteoarthropathy: can it differentiate uncomplicated Charcot's neuroarthropathy from osteomyelitis and softtissue infection? Nucl Med Commun 2007; 28(6):465-472.
119. Nawaz A, Torigian DA, Siegelman ES, Basu S,Chryssikos T, Alavi A. Diagnostic performance of FDG-PET, MRI, and plain film radiography (PFR) for the diagnosis of osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Mol Imaging Biol 2010;12(3):335-342.
120. Beckers C, Jeukens X, Ribbens C, et al. (18)F-FDG PET imaging of rheumatoid knee synovitis correlates with dynamic magnetic resonance and sonographic assessments as well as with the serum level of metalloproteinase-3. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33(3):275-280.
121. El-Haddad G, Kumar R, Pamplona R, Alavi A. PET/MRI depicts the exact location of meniscal tear associated with synovitis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006;33(4): 507-508.
122. Blebea JS, Houseni M, Torigian DA, et al. Structural and functional imaging of normal bone marrow and evaluation of its age-related changes. Semin Nucl Med 2007;37(3): 185-194.
123. Miese F, Scherer A, Ostendorf B, et al. Hybrid 18F-FDG PET-MRI of the hand in rheumatoid arthritis: initial results. Clin Rheumatol 2011;30(9):1247-1250.
124. Tanna NK, Kohn MI, Horwich DN, et al. Analysis of brain and cerebrospinal fluid volumes with MR imaging: impact on PET data correction for atrophy. Part II. Aging and Alzheimer dementia. Radiology 1991; 178(1):123-130.
125. Bural GG, Torigian DA, Burke A, et al. Quantitative assessment of the hepatic metabolic volume product in patients with diffuse hepatic steatosis and normal controls through use of FDG-PET and MR imaging: a novel concept. Mol Imaging Biol 2010;12(3):233-239.
126. Basu S, Houseni M, Bural G, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging based bone marrow segmentation for quantitative calculation of pure red marrow metabolism using 2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography: a novel application with significant implications for combined structure-function approach. Mol Imaging Biol 2007;9(6):361-365.
127. Nawaz A, Torigian D, Zhuang H, Alavi A. Study on the correlation of atherosclerosis in the popliteal artery with metabolic activity and metabolic volumetric product of the diabetic foot. J Nucl Med 2008;49(Suppl 1):197P.
128. von Schulthess GK, Schlemmer HP. A look ahead: PET/MR versus PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36(Suppl 1):S3-S9.
129. Brix G, Nekolla EA, Nosske D, Griebel J. Risks and safety aspects related to PET/MR examinations. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2009;36(Suppl 1):S131-S138.
130. Koyama S, Nakahara T, Sakurai T, Komatsubara Y, Isozumi Y, Miyakoshi J. Combined exposure of ELF magnetic fields and x-rays increased mutant yields compared with x-rays alone in pTN89 plasmids. J Radiat Res (Tokyo) 2005;46(2):257-264.
131. Miyakoshi J, Yoshida M, Shibuya K, Hiraoka M. Exposure to strong magnetic fields at power frequency potentiates X-ray-induced DNA strand breaks. J Radiat Res (Tokyo) 2000;41(3):293-302.
132. Walleczek J, Shiu EC, Hahn GM. Increase in radiation-induced HPRT gene mutation frequency after nonthermal exposure to nonionizing 60 Hz electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res 1999;151(4):489-497.
133. Hintenlang DE. Synergistic effects of ionizing radiation and 60 Hz magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics 1993;14(6):545-551.
134. Miyakoshi J. Effects of static magnetic fields at the cellular level. Prog Biophys Mol Biol 2005;87(2-3):213-223.
135. Theysohn JM, Maderwald S, Kraff O, Moenninghoff C, Ladd ME, Ladd SC. Subjective acceptance of 7 Tesla MRI for human imaging. MAGMA 2008;21(1-2):63-72.
136. Cho ZH, Son YD, Choi EJ, et al. In-vivo human brain molecular imaging with a brain-dedicated PET/MRI system. MAGMA 2013;26(1):71-79.