NEMA NU-4 2008 performance evaluation of Xtrim-PET: A prototype SiPM-based preclinical scanner

Medical Physics

Volumn 46, Issue 11, 2019, Pages 4816-4825

  Amirrashedi, Mahsa ^a,b   Sarkar, Saeed ^a,b   Ghafarian, Pardis ^c,d   Hashemi Shahraki, Reza ^a,b   Geramifar, Parham ^e   Zaidi, Habib ^f,g,h,i   Ay, Mohammad Reza ^a,b  

^a TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^b TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^c SHAHID BEHESHTI UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^d SHAHID BEHESHTI UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^e TEHRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

^f GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^g UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^h UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER GRONINGEN   (Netherlands)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

detectors; NEMA standard; performance evaluation; PET; small animal imaging

Indexed keywords

IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RESOLUTION; MOLECULAR IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; SCANNING;

NATIONAL ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURER ASSOCIATION STANDARD; NATIONAL ELECTRICAL MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATIONS; NOISE EQUIVALENT COUNT RATES; PERFORMANCES EVALUATION; PET SCANNER; PHANTOMS; SCATTER FRACTIONS; SILICON PHOTO MULTIPLIERS (SIPM); SMALL ANIMAL IMAGING; SPATIAL RESOLUTION;

PHANTOMS;

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; SILICON;

ARTICLE; FEMALE; IMAGE QUALITY; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RAT; ANIMAL; DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; IMAGING PHANTOM; LIGHT RELATED PHENOMENA; PHOTON; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO;

ANIMALS; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; MICE; OPTICAL PHENOMENA; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; PHOTONS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RATS; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO; SILICON;

EID: 85074019283     PISSN: 00942405     EISSN: 24734209     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/mp.13785     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Levin CS, Zaidi H. Current trends in preclinical PET system design. PET Clin. 2007;2:125–160.
2. Stout DB, Zaidi H. Preclinical multimodality imaging in vivo. PET Clin. 2008;3:251–273.
3. Krishnamoorthy S, Blankemeyer E, Mollet P, Surti S, Van Holen R, Karp JS. Performance evaluation of the MOLECUBES β-CUBE-a high spatial resolution and high sensitivity small animal PET scanner utilizing monolithic LYSO scintillation detectors. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:155013.
4. Belcari N, Camarlinghi N, Ferretti S, et al. NEMA NU-4 performance evaluation of the IRIS PET/CT preclinical scanner. IEEE Trans Rad Plasma Med Sci. 2017;1:301–309.
5. Wang Y, Seidel J, Tsui BM, Vaquero JJ, Pomper MG. Performance evaluation of the GE healthcare eXplore VISTA dual-ring small-animal PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1891–1900.
6. Sato K, Shidahara M, Watabe H, et al. Performance evaluation of the small-animal PET scanner ClairvivoPET using NEMA NU 4–2008 standards. Phys Med Biol. 2015;61:696–711.
7. Prasad R, Ratib O, Zaidi H. Performance evaluation of the FLEX Triumph™ X-PET scanner using the NEMA NU-04 standards. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1608–1615.
8. Prasad R, Ratib O, Zaidi H. NEMA NU-04-based performance characteristics of the LabPET-8™ small animal PET scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:6649–6664.
9. Canadas M, Embid M, Lage E, Desco M, Vaquero JJ, Perez JM. NEMA NU 4–2008 performance measurements of two commercial small-animal PET scanners: ClearPET and rPET-1. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2011;58:58–65.
10. Bergeron M, Cadorette J, Bureau-Oxton C, et al. Performance evaluation of the LabPET12, a large axial FOV APD-based digital PET scanner. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC); Oct. 24 -Nov. 1, 2009.
11. Balcerzyk M, Kontaxakis G, Delgado M, et al. Initial performance evaluation of a high resolution Albira small animal positron emission tomography scanner with monolithic crystals and depth-of-interaction encoding from a user's perspective. Meas Sci Technol. 2009;20:104011.
12. Goertzen AL, Bao Q, Bergeron M, et al. NEMA NU 4–2008 comparison of preclinical PET imaging systems. J Nucl Med. 2012;53:1300–1309.
13. Gu Z, Taschereau R, Vu NT, et al. Performance evaluation of G8, a high-sensitivity benchtop preclinical PET/CT tomograph. J Nucl Med. 2019;60:142–149.
14. Kemp BJ, Hruska CB, McFarland AR, Lenox MW, Lowe VJ. NEMA NU 2–2007 performance measurements of the Siemens Inveon preclinical small animal PET system. Phys Med Biol. 2009;54:2359–2376.
15. Wang L, Zhu J, Liang X, et al. Performance evaluation of the Trans-PET(R) BioCaliburn(R) LH system: a large FOV small-animal PET system. Phys Med Biol. 2015;60:137–150.
16. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA Standards Publication NU 4 – 2008. Performance Measurements of Small Animal Positron Emission Tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2008.
17. Vrigneaud JM, McGrath J, Courteau A, et al. Initial performance evaluation of a preclinical PET scanner available as a clip-on assembly in a sequential PET/MRI system. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:125007.
18. Stortz G, Thiessen JD, Bishop D, et al. Performance of a PET insert for high resolution small animal PET/MR imaging at 7T. J Nucl Med. 2017;59:536–542.
19. Perez-Liva M, Viel T, Yoganathan T, et al. Performance evaluation of the PET component of a hybrid PET/CT-ultrafast ultrasound imaging instrument. Phys Med Biol. 2018;63:19NT01.
20. Omidvari N, Cabello J, Topping G, et al. PET performance evaluation of MADPET4: a small animal PET insert for a 7 T MRI scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2017;62:8671–8692.
21. Nagy K, Toth M, Major P, et al. Performance evaluation of the small-animal nanoScan PET/MRI system. J Nucl Med. 2013;54:1825–1832.
22. Magota K, Kubo N, Kuge Y, Nishijima K, Zhao S, Tamaki N. Performance characterization of the Inveon preclinical small-animal PET/SPECT/CT system for multimodality imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:742–752.
23. Lee S, Choi Y, Jung JH, et al. Performance evaluation of a small animal PET scanner a high level of multiplexing and charge-signal transmission. Phys Med Biol. 2019;64:045015.
24. Knoess C, Siegel S, Smith A, et al. Performance evaluation of the microPET R4 PET scanner for rodents. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:737–747.
25. Hallen P, Schug D, Weissler B, et al. PET performance evaluation of the small-animal Hyperion II(D) PET/MRI insert based on the NEMA NU-4 standard. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2018;4:065027.
26. Gu Z, Taschereau R, Vu NT, et al. NEMA NU-4 performance evaluation of PETbox4, a high sensitivity dedicated PET preclinical tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:3791–3814.
27. Teuho J, Han C, Riehakainen L, et al. NEMA NU 4–2008 and in vivo imaging performance of RAYCAN trans-PET/CT X5 small animal imaging system. Phys Med Biol. 2019;64:115014.
28. Szanda I, Mackewn J, Patay G, et al. National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU-4 performance evaluation of the PET component of the NanoPET/CT preclinical PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:1741–1747.
29. Zhu J, Wang L, Kao C-M, Kim H, Xie Q. Performance evaluation of the Trans-PET®BioCaliburn® SH system. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A. 2015;777:148–153.
30. Zaidi H, Becker M. The Promise of hybrid PET/MRI: technical advances and clinical applications. IEEE Sign Proc Mag. 2016;33:67–85.
31. Cal-Gonzalez J, Rausch I, Shiyam Sundar LK, et al. Hybrid imaging: instrumentation and data processing. Front Phys. 2018;6:47.
32. Zeraatkar N, Sajedi S, Kaviani S, et al. Development of a preclinical PET system based on pixelated LYSO crystals and SiPM arrays. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC); 21–28 Oct. 2017.
33. Sajedi S, Zeraatkar N, Taheri M, et al. Generic high resolution PET detector block using 12 × 12 SiPM array. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2018;4:035014.
34. Sajedi S, Zeraatkar N, Taheri M, et al. A Generic, Scalable, and Cost-Effective Detector Front-End Block for PET. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC); 2017.
35. SensL D. C-Series Low Noise, Fast, Blue-Sensitive Silicon Photomultipliers Datasheet; 2014. http://sensl.com/downloads/ds/DS-MicroCseries.pdf
36. Badawi RD, Lodge MA, Marsden PK. Algorithms for calculating detector efficiency normalization coefficients for true coincidences in 3D PET. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43:189–205.
37. Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. Treatment of axial data in three-dimensional PET. J Nucl Med. 1987;28:1717–1724.
38. Defrise M, Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, Michel C, Sibomana M, Newport DF. Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3-D PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1997;16:145–158.
39. Yao R, Seidel J, Johnson CA, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Green MV, Carson RE. Performance characteristics of the 3-D OSEM algorithm in the reconstruction of small animal PET images. Ordered-subsets expectation-maximixation. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2000;19:798–804.
40. Elhami E, Boulding J, Goertzen AL. Variations on the NEMA NU4-2008 testing procedures and effect on the performance measurement results. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record; 23-29 Oct. 2011.
41. Sanaat A, Zafarghandi MS, Ay MR. Design and performance evaluation of high resolution small animal PET scanner based on monolithic crystal: a simulation study. J Instrum. 2019;14:P01005.
42. Schug D, Lerche C, Weissler B, et al. Initial PET performance evaluation of a preclinical insert for PET/MRI with digital SiPM technology. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:2851–2878.
43. Ko GB, Yoon HS, Kim KY, et al. Simultaneous multiparametric PET/MRI with silicon photomultiplier PET and ultra-high-field MRI for small-animal imaging. J Nucl Med. 2016;57:1309–1315.
44. Goertzen AL, Stortz G, Thiessen JD, et al. First results from a high-resolution small animal SiPM PET insert for PET/MR imaging at 7T. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2016;63:2424–2433.
45. Canadas M, Embid M, Lage E, Desco M, Vaquero JJ, Pérez JM. NEMA NU 4–2008 performance measurements of two commercial small-animal PET scanners: ClearPET and rPET-1. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2011;58:58–65.