超高灵敏度和连续床层运动对Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT性能特性的影响

Mostafa Roya, Charalampos Tsoumpas, Johannes H. van Snick, Viet Dao, Antoon T.M. Willemsen, Riemer H.J.A. Slart, Ronald Boellaard, Andor W.J.M. Glaudemans, Joyce van Sluis
{"title":"超高灵敏度和连续床层运动对Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT性能特性的影响","authors":"Mostafa Roya, Charalampos Tsoumpas, Johannes H. van Snick, Viet Dao, Antoon T.M. Willemsen, Riemer H.J.A. Slart, Ronald Boellaard, Andor W.J.M. Glaudemans, Joyce van Sluis","doi":"10.2967/jnumed.125.270078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Continuous bed motion (CBM) for long–axial-field-of-view PET/CT enables swift total-body examination of patients. However, the sensitivity profile along the axial field of view (AFOV) varies significantly, and its effect on image quality when combined with CBM remains unexplored. This study assesses the effects of ultrahigh sensitivity (UHS) and CBM on recovery coefficients (RCs) and spatial resolution (SR). <strong>Methods:</strong> Phantom measurements, performed in static bed and CBM acquisition with different bed speeds (3.5, 7, 14, and 30 mm/s), were reconstructed for both high-sensitivity (HS) and UHS modes, and their quality was assessed using the RC and full width at half maximum of the point-spread function. In addition, 7 clinically referred oncologic patients underwent a combined CBM and UHS [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET/CT scan. Metrics derived from lesions and healthy tissues were compared across acquisition modes. <strong>Results:</strong> Mean RC was lower in both UHS (&lt;4.2%) and CBM (&lt;5.9%) than with HS and static acquisitions, respectively. SR in UHS was slightly deteriorated in the central plane of the AFOV (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.06–0.21 mm) but remained comparable toward the edge (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.03–0.07 mm) to SR in HS. In addition, for CBM, SR differences were negligible (full width at half maximum difference, &lt;0.13 mm). SUVs in healthy tissues (<em>r</em><sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.94) and lesions (<em>r</em><sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.99) showed excellent correlation. The coefficient of variation was significantly different for the liver. <strong>Conclusion:</strong> Elaborate protocols using UHS and CBM could be a step toward swift total-body PET care with only a marginal increase in noise. CBM allows a larger part of the body to be examined and helps to mitigate substantial sensitivity differences along the AFOV, albeit at the cost of slightly lower RC.</p>","PeriodicalId":22820,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Nuclear Medicine","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Ultrahigh Sensitivity and Continuous Bed Motion on Performance Characteristics of Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT\",\"authors\":\"Mostafa Roya, Charalampos Tsoumpas, Johannes H. van Snick, Viet Dao, Antoon T.M. Willemsen, Riemer H.J.A. Slart, Ronald Boellaard, Andor W.J.M. Glaudemans, Joyce van Sluis\",\"doi\":\"10.2967/jnumed.125.270078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Continuous bed motion (CBM) for long–axial-field-of-view PET/CT enables swift total-body examination of patients. However, the sensitivity profile along the axial field of view (AFOV) varies significantly, and its effect on image quality when combined with CBM remains unexplored. This study assesses the effects of ultrahigh sensitivity (UHS) and CBM on recovery coefficients (RCs) and spatial resolution (SR). <strong>Methods:</strong> Phantom measurements, performed in static bed and CBM acquisition with different bed speeds (3.5, 7, 14, and 30 mm/s), were reconstructed for both high-sensitivity (HS) and UHS modes, and their quality was assessed using the RC and full width at half maximum of the point-spread function. In addition, 7 clinically referred oncologic patients underwent a combined CBM and UHS [<sup>18</sup>F]FDG PET/CT scan. Metrics derived from lesions and healthy tissues were compared across acquisition modes. <strong>Results:</strong> Mean RC was lower in both UHS (&lt;4.2%) and CBM (&lt;5.9%) than with HS and static acquisitions, respectively. SR in UHS was slightly deteriorated in the central plane of the AFOV (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.06–0.21 mm) but remained comparable toward the edge (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.03–0.07 mm) to SR in HS. In addition, for CBM, SR differences were negligible (full width at half maximum difference, &lt;0.13 mm). SUVs in healthy tissues (<em>r</em><sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.94) and lesions (<em>r</em><sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.99) showed excellent correlation. The coefficient of variation was significantly different for the liver. <strong>Conclusion:</strong> Elaborate protocols using UHS and CBM could be a step toward swift total-body PET care with only a marginal increase in noise. CBM allows a larger part of the body to be examined and helps to mitigate substantial sensitivity differences along the AFOV, albeit at the cost of slightly lower RC.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":22820,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Nuclear Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Nuclear Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.125.270078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Nuclear Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.125.270078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长轴视场PET/CT的连续床动(CBM)可以快速检查患者的全身。然而,沿轴向视场(AFOV)的灵敏度分布变化很大,并且当与CBM结合时,其对图像质量的影响尚未研究。本研究评估了超高灵敏度(UHS)和CBM对恢复系数(rc)和空间分辨率(SR)的影响。方法:在静态床和不同床速(3.5、7、14和30 mm/s)的CBM采集中进行幻像测量,重建高灵敏度(HS)和超高灵敏度(UHS)模式,并使用RC和点扩散函数最大值一半的全宽度来评估其质量。此外,7例临床转诊的肿瘤患者接受了CBM和UHS [18F]FDG PET/CT联合扫描。从病变和健康组织获得的指标在不同的获取模式下进行了比较。结果:UHS (<4.2%)和CBM (<5.9%)的平均RC分别低于HS和静态采集。UHS的SR在AFOV的中心平面(全宽度在最大差值的一半范围内,0.06 ~ 0.21 mm)略有恶化,但在边缘(全宽度在最大差值的一半范围内,0.03 ~ 0.07 mm)与HS的SR保持相当。此外,对于CBM, SR差异可以忽略不计(最大差异一半的全宽度,0.13 mm)。健康组织的suv (r2 > 0.94)与病变(r2 > 0.99)呈极好的相关性。肝脏的变异系数差异有统计学意义。结论:采用UHS和CBM的详细方案可以实现快速全身PET护理,而噪音只会轻微增加。CBM允许对身体的更大部分进行检查,并有助于减轻沿AFOV的实质性灵敏度差异,尽管代价是RC略低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Ultrahigh Sensitivity and Continuous Bed Motion on Performance Characteristics of Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT

Continuous bed motion (CBM) for long–axial-field-of-view PET/CT enables swift total-body examination of patients. However, the sensitivity profile along the axial field of view (AFOV) varies significantly, and its effect on image quality when combined with CBM remains unexplored. This study assesses the effects of ultrahigh sensitivity (UHS) and CBM on recovery coefficients (RCs) and spatial resolution (SR). Methods: Phantom measurements, performed in static bed and CBM acquisition with different bed speeds (3.5, 7, 14, and 30 mm/s), were reconstructed for both high-sensitivity (HS) and UHS modes, and their quality was assessed using the RC and full width at half maximum of the point-spread function. In addition, 7 clinically referred oncologic patients underwent a combined CBM and UHS [18F]FDG PET/CT scan. Metrics derived from lesions and healthy tissues were compared across acquisition modes. Results: Mean RC was lower in both UHS (<4.2%) and CBM (<5.9%) than with HS and static acquisitions, respectively. SR in UHS was slightly deteriorated in the central plane of the AFOV (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.06–0.21 mm) but remained comparable toward the edge (full width at half maximum difference range, 0.03–0.07 mm) to SR in HS. In addition, for CBM, SR differences were negligible (full width at half maximum difference, <0.13 mm). SUVs in healthy tissues (r2 > 0.94) and lesions (r2 > 0.99) showed excellent correlation. The coefficient of variation was significantly different for the liver. Conclusion: Elaborate protocols using UHS and CBM could be a step toward swift total-body PET care with only a marginal increase in noise. CBM allows a larger part of the body to be examined and helps to mitigate substantial sensitivity differences along the AFOV, albeit at the cost of slightly lower RC.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信