Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

A simple test to determine the quality of your clinical PET images

André Dobbeleir, Hamphrey Ham UGent, Ingeborg Goethals UGent, JOHAN KEPPENS UGent, Yves D'Asseler UGent and Christophe Van De Wiele UGent (2010) ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE. 24(10). p.751-757
abstract
The objective of the study was to present a simple method for comparing clinical PET images to a set of increasing quality images. Those different quality images were obtained by varying the activity concentration and the acquisition time. Images of a Jaszczak phantom were acquired with scan times that were calculated with a spreadsheet application for a personal computer to obtain 500, 1000, 2000, 5000, 7000 and 9000 counts/4 mm(3) voxel. During a 10-h period, each scan was repeated with longer acquisition times to obtain the same number of counts in the reconstructed images, but with lower count rate. On the second day, the study was repeated, putting the phantom in a water bath to simulate larger patients. The quality of the images obtained with the phantom in water was worse than without, as expected. Phantom data demonstrated clearly the effect of higher counts on image quality. Good quality images were obtained with counts above 5000 counts/voxel. Patient data can be situated to the phantom image set by comparing the counts per voxel and the activity concentration. The counts per voxel in all the regions of interest on patient data, with the exception of the brain, were at sub-optimal level leading to decreased image quality. It is clear that better image quality can be achieved mainly by incrementing the scan time. Our PET system, however, allows doubling our standard injected activity to obtain more image counts without significant contrast loss. This simple test can be performed at any PET center to situate the quality of routine clinical PET images in comparison to the optimal possible for that system.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
Dose, CT, BODY FDG-PET, PET scan, Image quality, Scan time, GUIDELINES, CHILDREN, SCAN DURATION, F-18-FDG PET/CT, IMPACT, CAMERA
journal title
ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE
Ann. Nucl. Med.
volume
24
issue
10
pages
751 - 757
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000285149700008
JCR category
RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
JCR impact factor
1.386 (2010)
JCR rank
71/111 (2010)
JCR quartile
3 (2010)
ISSN
0914-7187
DOI
10.1007/s12149-010-0413-7
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
1090867
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-1090867
date created
2010-12-21 16:31:00
date last changed
2011-06-17 13:00:22
@article{1090867,
  abstract     = {The objective of the study was to present a simple method for comparing clinical PET images to a set of increasing quality images. Those different quality images were obtained by varying the activity concentration and the acquisition time.
Images of a Jaszczak phantom were acquired with scan times that were calculated with a spreadsheet application for a personal computer to obtain 500, 1000, 2000, 5000, 7000 and 9000 counts/4 mm(3) voxel. During a 10-h period, each scan was repeated with longer acquisition times to obtain the same number of counts in the reconstructed images, but with lower count rate. On the second day, the study was repeated, putting the phantom in a water bath to simulate larger patients.
The quality of the images obtained with the phantom in water was worse than without, as expected. Phantom data demonstrated clearly the effect of higher counts on image quality. Good quality images were obtained with counts above 5000 counts/voxel. Patient data can be situated to the phantom image set by comparing the counts per voxel and the activity concentration. The counts per voxel in all the regions of interest on patient data, with the exception of the brain, were at sub-optimal level leading to decreased image quality. It is clear that better image quality can be achieved mainly by incrementing the scan time. Our PET system, however, allows doubling our standard injected activity to obtain more image counts without significant contrast loss.
This simple test can be performed at any PET center to situate the quality of routine clinical PET images in comparison to the optimal possible for that system.},
  author       = {Dobbeleir, Andr{\'e} and Ham, Hamphrey and Goethals, Ingeborg and KEPPENS, JOHAN and D'Asseler, Yves and Van De Wiele, Christophe},
  issn         = {0914-7187},
  journal      = {ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE},
  keyword      = {Dose,CT,BODY FDG-PET,PET scan,Image quality,Scan time,GUIDELINES,CHILDREN,SCAN DURATION,F-18-FDG PET/CT,IMPACT,CAMERA},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {10},
  pages        = {751--757},
  title        = {A simple test to determine the quality of your clinical PET images},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12149-010-0413-7},
  volume       = {24},
  year         = {2010},
}

Chicago
Dobbeleir, André, Hamphrey Ham, Ingeborg Goethals, JOHAN KEPPENS, Yves D’Asseler, and Christophe Van De Wiele. 2010. “A Simple Test to Determine the Quality of Your Clinical PET Images.” Annals of Nuclear Medicine 24 (10): 751–757.
APA
Dobbeleir, André, Ham, H., Goethals, I., KEPPENS, J., D’Asseler, Y., & Van De Wiele, C. (2010). A simple test to determine the quality of your clinical PET images. ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 24(10), 751–757.
Vancouver
1.
Dobbeleir A, Ham H, Goethals I, KEPPENS J, D’Asseler Y, Van De Wiele C. A simple test to determine the quality of your clinical PET images. ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE. 2010;24(10):751–7.
MLA
Dobbeleir, André, Hamphrey Ham, Ingeborg Goethals, et al. “A Simple Test to Determine the Quality of Your Clinical PET Images.” ANNALS OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE 24.10 (2010): 751–757. Print.