• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Direct comparison of PMT and SiPM PET systems using modified NEMA IEC Body phantom

J. Ptáček, P. Karhan, G. Horňák, L. Quinn

. 2025 ; 131 (-) : 104919. [pub] 20250209

Jazyk angličtina Země Itálie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, srovnávací studie

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc25009643

PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the image quality of the Siemens Biograph mCT40 (photomultiplier-based system - PMT) and the Siemens Vision600 (silicon photomultiplier-based system - SiPM) using a modified NEMA IEC Body phantom (Data Spectrum). METHODS: SiPM-based Vision600 has a smaller crystal size (3.2 × 3.2 mm vs. 4.0 × 4.0 mm in the PMT-based mCT40), resulting in better spatial resolution. Enhanced time-of-flight (TOF) timing and higher sensitivity leads to nearly four times higher effective sensitivity. The standard NEMA IEC Body phantom was modified with a 3D-printed holder to accommodate also Hollow and Micro Hollow Spheres of 15.4 mm, 12.4 mm, 7.9 mm, 6.2 mm, 5.0 mm, and 4.0 mm. Each of the three acquisition sessions per scanner included 18 time points and spanned 5.6 half-lives to assess system performance at varying activity concentrations in the field of view. RESULTS: Recovery curves for both systems were similar when identical post-reconstruction filters were applied. The SiPM-based Vision600 system detected smaller sources at significantly lower activity concentrations, and the variations in standardized uptake value (SUVmax, SUVA50) measurements were generally smaller compared to those of the PMT-based system. The two smallest sources became undetectable below 63 MBq and 16 MBq on the PMT system, versus 20 MBq and 6.5 MBq on the SiPM system. CONCLUSIONS: SiPM technology demonstrated superior performance compared to PMT in detecting small sources in low-activity scenarios and provided more robust quantification results. It is recommended to use averaged SUV metrics, such as SUVA50 or SUVpeak.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc25009643
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20250612125516.0
007      
ta
008      
250415e20250209it f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.ejmp.2025.104919 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)39929092
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a it
100    1_
$a Ptáček, Jaroslav $u Department of Medical Physics and Radiation Protection University Hospital Olomouc Czech Republic. Electronic address: jaroslav.ptacek@fnol.cz
245    10
$a Direct comparison of PMT and SiPM PET systems using modified NEMA IEC Body phantom / $c J. Ptáček, P. Karhan, G. Horňák, L. Quinn
520    9_
$a PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare the image quality of the Siemens Biograph mCT40 (photomultiplier-based system - PMT) and the Siemens Vision600 (silicon photomultiplier-based system - SiPM) using a modified NEMA IEC Body phantom (Data Spectrum). METHODS: SiPM-based Vision600 has a smaller crystal size (3.2 × 3.2 mm vs. 4.0 × 4.0 mm in the PMT-based mCT40), resulting in better spatial resolution. Enhanced time-of-flight (TOF) timing and higher sensitivity leads to nearly four times higher effective sensitivity. The standard NEMA IEC Body phantom was modified with a 3D-printed holder to accommodate also Hollow and Micro Hollow Spheres of 15.4 mm, 12.4 mm, 7.9 mm, 6.2 mm, 5.0 mm, and 4.0 mm. Each of the three acquisition sessions per scanner included 18 time points and spanned 5.6 half-lives to assess system performance at varying activity concentrations in the field of view. RESULTS: Recovery curves for both systems were similar when identical post-reconstruction filters were applied. The SiPM-based Vision600 system detected smaller sources at significantly lower activity concentrations, and the variations in standardized uptake value (SUVmax, SUVA50) measurements were generally smaller compared to those of the PMT-based system. The two smallest sources became undetectable below 63 MBq and 16 MBq on the PMT system, versus 20 MBq and 6.5 MBq on the SiPM system. CONCLUSIONS: SiPM technology demonstrated superior performance compared to PMT in detecting small sources in low-activity scenarios and provided more robust quantification results. It is recommended to use averaged SUV metrics, such as SUVA50 or SUVpeak.
650    12
$a fantomy radiodiagnostické $7 D019047
650    12
$a pozitronová emisní tomografie $x přístrojové vybavení $7 D049268
650    _2
$a počítačové zpracování obrazu $x metody $7 D007091
650    _2
$a křemík $7 D012825
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a srovnávací studie $7 D003160
700    1_
$a Karhan, Pavel $u Department of Medical Physics and Radiation Protection University Hospital Olomouc Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Horňák, Gregor $u Department of Nuclear Medicine University Hospital Olomouc Czech Republic $7 xx0333185
700    1_
$a Quinn, Libuše $u Department of Nuclear Medicine University Hospital Olomouc Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00167391 $t Physica medica $x 1724-191X $g Roč. 131 (20250209), s. 104919
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39929092 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20250415 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20250612125507 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 2311174 $s 1246724
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC-MEDLINE
BMC    __
$a 2025 $b 131 $c - $d 104919 $e 20250209 $i 1724-191X $m Physica medica $n Phys Med $x MED00167391
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20250415

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

Možnosti archivace

Nahrávání dat ...