The purpose of the study is to evaluate the physical performance of a Biograph mCT Flow R PET/CT system (Siemens Healthcare, Germany) and to. to fundamentally change how PET imaging is performed. Powered by Siemens’ revolutionary FlowMotion™ technology,. Biograph mCT Flow™ is the world’s first. Biograph mCT Flow with FlowMotion™ technology combines our standard- setting PET/CT with a unique system design that enables continuous motion of.
|Published (Last):||25 November 2018|
|PDF File Size:||1.98 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||11.81 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. The scatter fraction was Conclusions The spatial resolution, sensitivity, scatter fraction, and count rates were in concordance with the published values for the predecessor system, the Biograph mCT.
This difference warrants further discussion.
Furthermore, no relevant difference of the SUV mean of the liver as reference organ could be observed, and the comparison of the CVs of the liver showed no clinical relevant differences. Impact of point spread function modelling and time of flight on FDG uptake measurements in lung lesions using alternative filtering strategies.
Time of flight in PET revisited. The expected value of the true count rate is gained by a fit through all data below the peak NECR standard as opposed to the extrapolated values from the last three acquisitions standard.
At the start of the first measurement, the activity of the point source was 0.
Biograph mCT for Radiation Oncology – Siemens Healthineers Global
Based on this relationship, a considerable decrease in detectability is expected when the acquisition time biogrph reduced by a factor of 2, which is inevitably related to image contrast.
The calculated activities at the start of the second scan were 5. This is the result of the low sensitivity in this part of the axial FOV Fig. A similar increase was observed in the CVs which equate to the background variability in the bladder biotraph the two patients. Thus, users may opt for applying PSF and other geometric corrections to the data, which inevitable makes inter-system comparisons more difficult.
When the effects of post-filtering and acquisition duration are taken into account, the values measured in this study show a closer conformance to those previously published [ 6 ]. Accuracy of count losses and random corrections For this evaluation, the measurements acquired for the evaluation of the scatter fraction and count rate performance was used.
Traditionally, whole-body PET examinations are performed in step-and-shoot SS mode, introducing the patient table motion between consecutive acquisitions of adjacent bed positions [ 1011 biograh. This configuration provides an axial field-of-view FOV of While the difference in error may nct small, the exclusion of the end slices as permitted in the NEMA NU protocol should be followed anyway, as these end slices often suffer from high noise levels due to the low sensitivity of the scanner at the end of the axial FOV Fig.
These settings were selected to cover the same axial FOV in the same time as performed with the IQ phantom measurements. Scintillator crystals for PET.
Mean standardized uptake values SUVs mean and coefficient of variations CVs were calculated for spherical volumes of interest VOI with 3-cm diameter placed in the liver and the bladder. Nevertheless, CTM enables the use of varying table speeds for different axial regions. Performance measurements of positron emission tomographs. Schematic diagram of a step-and-shoot SS left and continuous right table motion CTM acquisition protocol.
Our data indicate a similar performance of the Biogarph components of the mCT Flow and its predecessor system, the mCT [ 6 ] with the residual differences being discussed below. The scatter fraction was calculated to be The measured sensitivity was 9. The measurements were performed at the center of the FOV and at cm radial offset. The remaining two largest biogrsph were filled with non-radioactive water.
The phantom was positioned with all spheres aligned within the same transaxial image plane in the center of the FOV.
Of note, the standard permits for a range of image reconstruction methods. No noticeable differences were seen in the contrast recovery as well as in the image quality obtained with sequential and CTM acquisition modes, although the background variability in the phantom measurements was biograhp higher when using CTM acquisitions.
Random sinogram variance reduction in continuous bed motion acquisition. Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements.
This information can be used to significantly improve the image signal-to-noise ratio SNR biograpg the reconstructed PET images, thus, allowing for better image quality and shorter acquisition times [ 89 ].