NEMA Characterization of the SAFIR Prototype PET Insert

Overview

Journal EJNMMI Phys

Specialty Radiology

Date 2022 Jun 13

PMID 35695989

Authors

Parisa Khateri

Werner Lustermann

Christian Ritzer

Charalampos Tsoumpas

Gunther Dissertori

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The SAFIR prototype insert is a preclinical Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanner built to acquire dynamic images simultaneously with a 7 T Bruker Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scanner. The insert is designed to perform with an excellent coincidence resolving time of 194 ps Full Width Half Maximum (FWHM) and an energy resolution of 13.8% FWHM. These properties enable it to acquire precise quantitative images at activities as high as 500 MBq suitable for studying fast biological processes within short time frames (< 5 s). In this study, the performance of the SAFIR prototype insert is evaluated according to the NEMA NU 4-2008 standard while the insert is inside the MRI without acquiring MRI data.

Results: Applying an energy window of 391-601 keV and a coincidence time window of 500 ps the following results are achieved. The average spatial resolution at 5 mm radial offset is 2.6 mm FWHM when using the Filtered Backprojection 3D Reprojection (FBP3DRP) reconstruction method, improving to 1.2 mm when using the Maximum Likelihood Expectation Maximization (MLEM) method. The peak sensitivity at the center of the scanner is 1.06%. The Noise Equivalent count Rate (NECR) is 799 kcps at the highest measured activity of 537 MBq for the mouse phantom and 121 kcps at the highest measured activity of 624 MBq for the rat phantom. The NECR peak is not yet reached for any of the measurements. The scatter fractions are 10.9% and 17.8% for the mouse and rat phantoms, respectively. The uniform region of the image quality phantom has a 3.0% STD, with a 4.6% deviation from the expected number of counts per voxel. The spill-over ratios for the water and air chambers are 0.18 and 0.17, respectively.

Conclusions: The results satisfy all the requirements initially considered for the insert, proving that the SAFIR prototype insert can obtain dynamic images of small rodents at high activities ([Formula: see text] 500 MBq) with a high sensitivity and an excellent count-rate performance.

Citing Articles

ASICs in PET: what we have and what we need.

Nadig V, Gundacker S, Herweg K, Naunheim S, Schug D, Weissler B EJNMMI Phys. 2025; 12(1):16.

PMID: 39939493 PMC: 11822191. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-025-00717-8.

SAFIR-I: first NEMA NU 4-2008-based performance characterization.

Bebie P, Lustermann W, Debus J, Ritzer C, Dissertori G, Weber B EJNMMI Phys. 2023; 10(1):81.

PMID: 38085381 PMC: 10716090. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-023-00603-1.

SAFIR-I: Design and Performance of a High-Rate Preclinical PET Insert for MRI.

Bebie P, Becker R, Commichau V, Debus J, Dissertori G, Djambazov L Sensors (Basel). 2021; 21(21).

PMID: 34770344 PMC: 8588038. DOI: 10.3390/s21217037.

References

Goertzen A, Bao Q, Bergeron M, Blankemeyer E, Blinder S, Canadas M . NEMA NU 4-2008 comparison of preclinical PET imaging systems. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53(8):1300-9. PMC: 4128012. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.111.099382. View

Surti S, Karp J, Perkins A, Cardi C, Daube-Witherspoon M, Kuhn A . Imaging performance of A-PET: a small animal PET camera. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005; 24(7):844-52. DOI: 10.1109/tmi.2005.844078. View

Oliver J, Rafecas M . Modelling Random Coincidences in Positron Emission Tomography by Using Singles and Prompts: A Comparison Study. PLoS One. 2016; 11(9):e0162096. PMC: 5014417. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0162096. View

Weber B, Spath N, Wyss M, Wild D, Burger C, Stanley R . Quantitative cerebral blood flow measurements in the rat using a beta-probe and H2 15O. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2003; 23(12):1455-60. DOI: 10.1097/01.WCB.0000095799.98378.7D. View

Gsell W, Molinos C, Correcher C, Belderbos S, Wouters J, Junge S . Characterization of a preclinical PET insert in a 7 tesla MRI scanner: beyond NEMA testing. Phys Med Biol. 2020; 65(24):245016. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aba08c. View

Amirrashedi M, Sarkar S, Ghafarian P, Shahraki R, Geramifar P, Zaidi H . NEMA NU-4 2008 performance evaluation of Xtrim-PET: A prototype SiPM-based preclinical scanner. Med Phys. 2019; 46(11):4816-4825. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13785. View

Prasad R, Ratib O, Zaidi H . NEMA NU-04-based performance characteristics of the LabPET-8™ small animal PET scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2011; 56(20):6649-64. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/20/009. View

Wong W, Li H, Baghaei H, Zhang Y, Ramirez R, Liu S . Engineering and performance (NEMA and animal) of a lower-cost higher-resolution animal PET/CT scanner using photomultiplier-quadrant-sharing detectors. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53(11):1786-93. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.103507. View

Becker R, Casella C, Dissertori G, Fischer J, Howard A, Jeitler A . The SAFIR project: an innovative high rate preclinical PET/MR detector towards dynamic multimodal imaging. EJNMMI Phys. 2016; 2(Suppl 1):A15. PMC: 4798695. DOI: 10.1186/2197-7364-2-S1-A15. View

10.

Weissler B, Gebhardt P, Dueppenbecker P, Wehner J, Schug D, Lerche C . A Digital Preclinical PET/MRI Insert and Initial Results. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2015; 34(11):2258-70. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2015.2427993. View

11.

Bao Q, Newport D, Chen M, Stout D, Chatziioannou A . Performance evaluation of the inveon dedicated PET preclinical tomograph based on the NEMA NU-4 standards. J Nucl Med. 2009; 50(3):401-8. PMC: 2803022. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.108.056374. View

12.

Defrise M, Kinahan P, Townsend D, Michel C, Sibomana M, Newport D . Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3-D PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1997; 16(2):145-58. DOI: 10.1109/42.563660. View

13.

Nagy K, Toth M, Major P, Patay G, Egri G, Haggkvist J . Performance evaluation of the small-animal nanoScan PET/MRI system. J Nucl Med. 2013; 54(10):1825-32. DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.119065. View

14.

Thielemans K, Tsoumpas C, Mustafovic S, Beisel T, Aguiar P, Dikaios N . STIR: software for tomographic image reconstruction release 2. Phys Med Biol. 2012; 57(4):867-83. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/57/4/867. View

15.

Hallen P, Schug D, Schulz V . Comments on the NEMA NU 4-2008 Standard on Performance Measurement of Small Animal Positron Emission Tomographs. EJNMMI Phys. 2020; 7(1):12. PMC: 7040118. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-020-0279-2. View

16.

Vrigneaud J, McGrath J, Courteau A, Pegg R, Gomis A, Camacho A . Initial performance evaluation of a preclinical PET scanner available as a clip-on assembly in a sequential PET/MRI system. Phys Med Biol. 2018; 63(12):125007. DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/aac4f7. View

17.

Khateri P, Fischer J, Lustermann W, Tsoumpas C, Dissertori G . Implementation of cylindrical PET scanners with block detector geometry in STIR. EJNMMI Phys. 2019; 6(1):15. PMC: 6663957. DOI: 10.1186/s40658-019-0248-9. View

18.

Knoess C, Siegel S, Smith A, Newport D, Richerzhagen N, Winkeler A . Performance evaluation of the microPET R4 PET scanner for rodents. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003; 30(5):737-47. DOI: 10.1007/s00259-002-1052-6. View

19.

Shepp L, Vardi Y . Maximum likelihood reconstruction for emission tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1982; 1(2):113-22. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.1982.4307558. View

20.

Hallen P, Schug D, Weissler B, Gebhardt P, Salomon A, Kiessling F . PET performance evaluation of the small-animal Hyperion II PET/MRI insert based on the NEMA NU-4 standard. Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2019; 4(6):065027. PMC: 6329443. DOI: 10.1088/2057-1976/aae6c2. View