Hidenobu Hashimoto, Keiichiro Kuronuma, Mark C Hyun, Donghee Han, Valerie Builoff, Sebastian Cadet, Damini Dey, Daniel S Berman, Jacek Kwiecinski, Piotr J Slomka
{"title":"数字光子计数硅光电倍增管与传统扫描仪在 18F - 氟化钠冠状 PET 成像方面的正面比较。","authors":"Hidenobu Hashimoto, Keiichiro Kuronuma, Mark C Hyun, Donghee Han, Valerie Builoff, Sebastian Cadet, Damini Dey, Daniel S Berman, Jacek Kwiecinski, Piotr J Slomka","doi":"10.1016/j.nuclcard.2024.102045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared silicone photomultipliers with digital photon counting (SiPM) and photomultiplier tubes (PMT) positron emission tomography (PET) in imaging coronary plaque activity with <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (<sup>18</sup>F-NaF) and evaluated comprehensively SiPM PET reconstruction settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 25 cardiovascular disease patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years), we conducted <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET on a SiPM (Biograph Vision) and conventional PET (Discovery 710) on the same day as part of a prospective clinical trial (NCT03689946). Following administration of 250 MBq of <sup>18</sup>F-NaF, patients underwent a contrast-enhanced CT angiography and a 30-min PET acquisition in list-mode on each PET consecutively. Image noise was defined as mean standard deviation of blood pool activity within the left atria. Target-to-background ratio (TBR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured within the whole-vessel tubular three-dimensional volumes of interest on the cardiac motion and attenuation-corrected <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET images using dedicated software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in image noise and background activity between the two PETs (Image noise (%), PMT: 7.6 ± 3.7 vs SiPM: 4.0 ± 2.3, P < 0.001; background activity, PMT: 1.4 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.0 ± 0.3, P < 0.001). Similarly, the SNR and TBR were significantly higher in vessels scanned with the SiPM PET (SNR, PMT: 16.3 ± 11.5 vs SiPM: 32.7 ± 29.8, P < 0.001; TBR, PMT: 0.8 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.1 ± 0.6, P < 0.001). SiPM PET image reconstruction with a 256 matrix, 1.4 mm pixel, and 2 mm Gaussian filter provided best trade off in terms of maximal SNR, TBR, and clinically practical file size.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In <sup>18</sup>F-NaF coronary PET imaging, the SiPM PET showed superior image contrast and less image noise compared with PMT PET.</p>","PeriodicalId":16476,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nuclear Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Head-to-head comparison of <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride coronary PET imaging between a silicon photomultiplier with digital photon counting and conventional scanners.\",\"authors\":\"Hidenobu Hashimoto, Keiichiro Kuronuma, Mark C Hyun, Donghee Han, Valerie Builoff, Sebastian Cadet, Damini Dey, Daniel S Berman, Jacek Kwiecinski, Piotr J Slomka\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.nuclcard.2024.102045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>We compared silicone photomultipliers with digital photon counting (SiPM) and photomultiplier tubes (PMT) positron emission tomography (PET) in imaging coronary plaque activity with <sup>18</sup>F-sodium fluoride (<sup>18</sup>F-NaF) and evaluated comprehensively SiPM PET reconstruction settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 25 cardiovascular disease patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years), we conducted <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET on a SiPM (Biograph Vision) and conventional PET (Discovery 710) on the same day as part of a prospective clinical trial (NCT03689946). Following administration of 250 MBq of <sup>18</sup>F-NaF, patients underwent a contrast-enhanced CT angiography and a 30-min PET acquisition in list-mode on each PET consecutively. Image noise was defined as mean standard deviation of blood pool activity within the left atria. Target-to-background ratio (TBR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured within the whole-vessel tubular three-dimensional volumes of interest on the cardiac motion and attenuation-corrected <sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET images using dedicated software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were significant differences in image noise and background activity between the two PETs (Image noise (%), PMT: 7.6 ± 3.7 vs SiPM: 4.0 ± 2.3, P < 0.001; background activity, PMT: 1.4 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.0 ± 0.3, P < 0.001). Similarly, the SNR and TBR were significantly higher in vessels scanned with the SiPM PET (SNR, PMT: 16.3 ± 11.5 vs SiPM: 32.7 ± 29.8, P < 0.001; TBR, PMT: 0.8 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.1 ± 0.6, P < 0.001). SiPM PET image reconstruction with a 256 matrix, 1.4 mm pixel, and 2 mm Gaussian filter provided best trade off in terms of maximal SNR, TBR, and clinically practical file size.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In <sup>18</sup>F-NaF coronary PET imaging, the SiPM PET showed superior image contrast and less image noise compared with PMT PET.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16476,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nuclear Cardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nuclear Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2024.102045\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nuclear Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2024.102045","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景：我们比较了硅光电倍增管与数字光子计数（SiPM）和光电倍增管（PMT）PET在用18F-氟化钠（18F-NaF）成像冠状动脉斑块活动时的效果，并全面评估了SiPM PET重建设置：作为前瞻性临床试验（NCT03689946）的一部分，我们在同一天对 25 名心血管疾病患者（平均年龄 67±12 岁）在 SiPM（Biograph Vision）和传统 PET（Discovery 710）上进行了 18F-NaF PET 扫描。给药 250 MBq 18F-NaF 后，患者连续接受造影剂增强 CT 血管造影和 30 分钟的 PET 列表模式采集。图像噪声定义为左心房内血池活动的平均标准偏差。使用专用软件测量心脏运动和衰减校正 18F-NaF PET 图像上感兴趣的全血管管状三维体积内的目标-背景比（TBR）和信噪比（SNR）：结果：两种 PET 在图像噪声和背景活动方面存在明显差异（图像噪声（%），PMT：7.6±3.7 vs. SiPM：4.0±2.3，p结论：在 18F-NaF 冠状动脉 PET 成像中，与 PMT PET 相比，SiPM PET 的图像对比度更高，图像噪声更小。
Head-to-head comparison of 18F-sodium fluoride coronary PET imaging between a silicon photomultiplier with digital photon counting and conventional scanners.
Background: We compared silicone photomultipliers with digital photon counting (SiPM) and photomultiplier tubes (PMT) positron emission tomography (PET) in imaging coronary plaque activity with 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) and evaluated comprehensively SiPM PET reconstruction settings.
Methods: In 25 cardiovascular disease patients (mean age 67 ± 12 years), we conducted 18F-NaF PET on a SiPM (Biograph Vision) and conventional PET (Discovery 710) on the same day as part of a prospective clinical trial (NCT03689946). Following administration of 250 MBq of 18F-NaF, patients underwent a contrast-enhanced CT angiography and a 30-min PET acquisition in list-mode on each PET consecutively. Image noise was defined as mean standard deviation of blood pool activity within the left atria. Target-to-background ratio (TBR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were measured within the whole-vessel tubular three-dimensional volumes of interest on the cardiac motion and attenuation-corrected 18F-NaF PET images using dedicated software.
Results: There were significant differences in image noise and background activity between the two PETs (Image noise (%), PMT: 7.6 ± 3.7 vs SiPM: 4.0 ± 2.3, P < 0.001; background activity, PMT: 1.4 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.0 ± 0.3, P < 0.001). Similarly, the SNR and TBR were significantly higher in vessels scanned with the SiPM PET (SNR, PMT: 16.3 ± 11.5 vs SiPM: 32.7 ± 29.8, P < 0.001; TBR, PMT: 0.8 ± 0.4 vs SiPM: 1.1 ± 0.6, P < 0.001). SiPM PET image reconstruction with a 256 matrix, 1.4 mm pixel, and 2 mm Gaussian filter provided best trade off in terms of maximal SNR, TBR, and clinically practical file size.
Conclusions: In 18F-NaF coronary PET imaging, the SiPM PET showed superior image contrast and less image noise compared with PMT PET.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Nuclear Cardiology is the only journal in the world devoted to this dynamic and growing subspecialty. Physicians and technologists value the Journal not only for its peer-reviewed articles, but also for its timely discussions about the current and future role of nuclear cardiology. Original articles address all aspects of nuclear cardiology, including interpretation, diagnosis, imaging equipment, and use of radiopharmaceuticals. As the official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the Journal also brings readers the latest information emerging from the Society''s task forces and publishes guidelines and position papers as they are adopted.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
