Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
EJNMMI Research
Published in: EJNMMI Research 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Original research

Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET/CT system

Authors: Jun Zhang, Piotr Maniawski, Michael V. Knopp

Published in: EJNMMI Research | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The first solid-state silicon photomultiplier (SiPM) digital photon counting (DPC) clinical PET/CT system was introduced by Philips in recent years. The system differs from other SiPM-based PET/CT systems and uses lutetiumyttrium oxyorthosilicate (LYSO) scintillators directly coupled with their own individual SiPM DPC detectors eliminating the need for Anger-logic positioning decoding. We evaluated the system performance, characteristics, and stability of the next generation DPC clinical PET/CT based on NEMA NU2-2012 tests, NEMA NU2-2018 test (timing resolution) and human studies.

Results

An energy resolution of 11.2% was measured. NEMA NU2-2012 tests revealed a spatial resolution (mm in FWHM) from (3.96, 4.01, 4.01) at 1 cm to (5.81, 5.83, 4.95) at 20 cm for (axial, radial, tangential). A 5.7 cps/kBq system sensitivity was measured. Peak noise equivalent count rate (NECR) and peak true count rate could not be determined as each exhibited increasing values up to the maximum activity measured (~ 1100 MBq). The maximum NECR was 171 kcps @ 50.5 kBq/mL, with corresponding scatter fraction of 30.8% and maximum trues of 681 kcps. NEMA hot sphere contrast ranged from 62% (10 mm) to 88% (22 mm), cold sphere contrast of 86% (28 mm) and 89% (37 mm). A timing resolution of 322 ps (22Na point source based) and 332 ps (NEMA NU2-2018) was obtained. It revealed < 1% change in TOF timing and ± 0.4% change in energy resolution during 31-month stability monitoring. CQIE assessment found < 3% axial variance in SUV. 100–60% recovery coefficients of activity concentration at various sphere sizes and contrast levels were measured.

Conclusions

This scanner represents the first solid-state DPC PET/CT, a technologic leap beyond photomultipliers tubes and anger logic. It presents considerable improvements in system performance and characteristics with excellent time-of-flight capability compared to conventional photomultiplier tube (PMT) PET/CT systems. The DPC system leads to promising clinical opportunities with excellent image quality, lesion detectability, and diagnostic confidence.
Literature
1.
Mirzoyan R, Laatiaoui M, Teshima M. Very high quantum efficiency PMTs with bialkali photo-cathode. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2006;567:230–2.CrossRef
2.
Roncali E, Cherry SR. Application of silicon photomultipliers to positron emission tomography. Ann Biomed Eng. 2011;39(4):1358–77.CrossRef
3.
Daube-Witherspoon ME, Surti S, Perkins A, Kyba CCM, Wiener R, Werner ME, et al. The imaging performance of a LaBr3-based PET scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:45–64.CrossRef
4.
Peng Q, Choong WS, Vu C, Huber JS, Janecek M, Wilson D, et al. Performance of the tachyon time-of-flight PET camera. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2015;62(1):111–9.CrossRef
5.
Son JW, Ko GB, Won JY, Yoon HS, Lee JS. Development and performance evaluation of a time-of-flight positron emission tomography detector based on a high-quantum-efficiency multi-anode photomultiplier tube. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2016;63(1):44–51.CrossRef
6.
Gasanov AG. Soviet technical. Physics Letters Sov. 1988;14:313.
7.
Bondarenko G, Buzhan P, Dolgoshein B, Smirnov K. Limited Geiger mode microcell photodiode: new results. Nucl Inst Methods. 2000;A442:187–92.CrossRef
8.
Golovin V, Saveliev V. Novel type of avalanche photodetector with Geiger mode operation. Nucl Inst Methods. 2004;A518:560–4.CrossRef
9.
Catana C, Wu Y, Judenhofer MS, Qi J, Pichler BJ, Cherry SR. Simultaneous acquisition of multislice PET and MR images: initial results with a MR-compatible PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 2006;47:1968–76.PubMed
10.
Herbert DJ, Moehrs S, D’Ascenzo N, Belcari N, Del Guerra A, Morsani F. The silicon photomultiplier for application to high-resolution positron emission tomography. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2007;A573:84–7.CrossRef
11.
Britvitch I, Johnson I, Renker D, Stoykov A, Lorenz E. Characterization of Geiger-mode avalanche photodiodes for medical imaging applications. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys. Res. 2007;A571:308–11.CrossRef
12.
McElroy DP, Saveliev V, Reznik A, Rowlands LA. Evaluation of silicon photomultipliers: a promising new detector for MR compatible PET. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2007;A571:106–9.CrossRef
13.
Musienko Y, Auffray E, Lecoq P, Reucroft S, Swain J, Trummer J. Study of multi-pixelbecame avalanche photodiodes as a read-out for PET. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2007;A571:362–5.CrossRef
14.
Renker D. New trends in photodetectors. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res. 2007;A71:1–6.CrossRef
15.
Lewellen TK. Recent developments in PET detector technology. Phys Med Biol. 2008;53(17):287–17.CrossRef
16.
Delso G, Furst S, Jakoby B, Ladebeck R, Ganter C, Nekolla SG, et al. Performance measurements of the Siemens mMR integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(12):1914–22.CrossRef
17.
Th F, Prescher G, Degenhardt G, Gruyter R, Schmitz A, Ballizany R. The digital silicon photomultiplier – principle of operation and intrinsic detector performance. Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record; 2009. p. N28–5.
18.
Nguyen NC, Vercher-Conejero JL, Sattar A, Miller MA, Maniawski PJ, Jordan DW, et al. Image quality and diagnostic performance of a digital PET prototype in patients with oncologic diseases: initial experience and comparison with analog PET. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(9):1378–85.CrossRef
19.
20.
Schaart DR, Charbon E, Frach T, Schulz V. Advances in digital SiPMs and their application in biomedical imaging. Nucl Inst Methods Phys Res A. 2016;809:31–52.CrossRef
21.
Zhang J, Miller M, Knopp MV. Performance evaluation of digital PET/CT: medical physics basis for the clinical applications. Med Phys. 2016;43(6):3399.
22.
Wang W, Hu Z, Gualtieri EE, Parma MJ, Walsh ES, Sebok D, et al. Systematic and distributed time-of-flight list-mode PET reconstruction. Proc Nuclear Science Symp Conf Rec. 2006;3:1715–7.
23.
24.
25.
Casey ME, Hoffman EJ. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography. A technique to reduce noise in accidental coincidence measurements and coincidence efficiency calibration. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986;10:845–50.CrossRef
26.
Richardson WH. Bayesian-based iterative method of image restoration. J Opt Soc Am. 1972;62:55–9.CrossRef
27.
Lucy LB. An iterative technique for the rectification of observed distributions. Astron J. 1974;79:745–65.CrossRef
28.
Zhang B, Olivier P, Lorman B, Tung C. PET image resolution recovery using PSF-based ML-EM deconvolution with blob-based list-mode TOF reconstruction. J Nucl Med. 2011;52(Supplement 1):266.
29.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 2-2012: Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs (PETs). Rosslyn: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2013.
30.
Matej S, Lewitt RM. 3D-FRP: direct Fourier reconstruction with Fourier reprojection for fully 3-D PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48(4):1378–85.CrossRef
31.
Saha GB. Performance Characteristics of PET Scanners. In: Basics of PET Imaging. New York: Springer; 2010.CrossRef
32.
Bailey DL, Jones T, Spinks TS. A method for measuring the absolute sensitivity of positron emission tomographic scanners. Eur J Nucl Med. 1991;18:374–9.CrossRef
33.
National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 2-2018: Performance Measurements of Positron Emission Tomographs (PET). Rosslyn: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2018.
34.
Mao Y, Miller M, Bai C, et al. Evaluation of a TOF resolution measurement method using standard NEMA NEC phantom. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(supplement 1):436.
35.
Wang GC, Li X, Niu X, Du H, Balakrishnan K, Ye H, et al. PET timing performance measurement method using NEMA NEC phantom. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2016;63(3):1335–42.CrossRef
36.
Rosen M, Kinahan PE, Gimpel JF, Opanowski A, Siegel BA, Hill GC, et al. Performance observations of scanner qualification of NCI-designated cancer centers: results from the centers of quantitative imaging excellence (CQIE) program. Acad Radiol. 2017;24(2):232–45.CrossRef
37.
MacFarlane CR. American College of Radiologists. ACR accreditation of nuclear medicine and PET imaging departments. J Nucl Med Technol. 2006;34(1):18–24.PubMed
38.
39.
40.
Karp JS, Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. The benefit of time-of-flight in PET imaging: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(3):462–70.CrossRef
41.
Conti M. Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(6):1147–57.CrossRef
42.
Surti S, Kuhn A, Werner ME, Perkins AE, Kolthammer J, Karp JS. Performance of Philips Gemini TF PET/CT scanner with special consideration for its time-of-flight imaging capabilities. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(3):471–80.PubMed
43.
Bettinardi V, Presotto L, Rapisarda E, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC. Physical performance of the new hybrid PET/CT Discovery-690. Med Phys. 2011;38:5394–11.CrossRef
44.
Kolthammer JA, Su KH, Grover A, Narayanan M, Jordan DW, Muzic RF. Performance evaluation of the ingenuity TF PET/CT scanner with a focus on high count-rate conditions. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59(14):3843–59.CrossRef
45.
Rausch I, Cal-González J, Dapra D, Gallowitsch HJ, Lind P, Beyer T, et al. Performance evaluation of the biograph mCT flow PET/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard. EJNMMI Phys. 2015;2:26.CrossRef
46.
Jakoby BW, Bercier Y, Conti M, Casey ME, Bendriem B, Townsend DW. Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56(8):2375.CrossRef
47.
Karlberg AM, Sæther O, Eikenes L, Goa PE. Quantitative comparison of PET performance—Siemens biograph mCT and mMR. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Phys. 2016;3:5.
48.
Burr KC, Wang G-CJ, Du H, Mann G, Balakrishnan K, Wang J, et al. A new modular and scalable detector for a time-of-flight PET scanner. IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC); 2012. p. 2830–4.
49.
Vandenberghe S, Mikhaylova E, D’Hoe E, Mollet P, Karp JS. Recent developments in time-of-flight PET. EJNMMI Physics. 2016;3:3.CrossRef
50.
51.
Hsu DFC, Ilan E, Peterson WT, Uribe J, Lubberink M, Levin CS. Studies of a next generation silicon-photomultiplier-based time-of-flight PET/CT system. J Nucl Med. 2017;58(9):1511–8.CrossRef
52.
Huesman RH. The effects of a finite number of projection angles and finite lateral sampling of projections on the propagation of statistical errors in transverse section reconstruction. Phys Med Biol. 1977;22:511.CrossRef
53.
Moses WW. Fundamental limits of spatial resolution in PET. Nucl Inst Methods Phys Res A. 2011;648:S236–40.CrossRef
54.
55.
Budinger TF. Time-of-flight positron emission tomography: status relative to conventional PET. J Nucl Med. 1983;24(1):73–8.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Performance evaluation of the next generation solid-state digital photon counting PET/CT system
Authors
Jun Zhang
Piotr Maniawski
Michael V. Knopp
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
EJNMMI Research / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2191-219X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-018-0448-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

EJNMMI Research 1/2018 Go to the issue

Original research

Volume-of-interest-based supervised cluster analysis for pseudo-reference region selection in [18F]DPA-714 PET imaging of the rat brain

Original research

Presurgical localization of infected avascular bone segments in chronic complicated posttraumatic osteomyelitis in the lower extremity using dual-tracer PET/CT

Original research

Prognostic value of simultaneous 18F-FDG PET/MRI using a combination of metabolo-volumetric parameters and apparent diffusion coefficient in treated head and neck cancer

Original research

Multicentre analysis of PET SUV using vendor-neutral software: the Japanese Harmonization Technology (J-Hart) study

Original research

A semi-automatic technique to quantify complex tuberculous lung lesions on 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computerised tomography images

Original research

Dopamine transporter imaging with [18F]FE-PE2I PET and [123I]FP-CIT SPECT—a clinical comparison