Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Demir, Mustafa; Toklu, Türkay; Abuqbeitah, Mohammad; Çetin, Hüseyin; Sezgin, H. Sezer; Yeyin, Nami; Sönmezoğlu, Kerim (2018)
Publisher: Galenos Publishing
Journal: Molecular Imaging and Radionuclide Therapy
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Original Article, PET/CT, R, NEMA tests, quality control, R5-920, PET/MR, Medicine (General), Medicine, R895-920, Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine
Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare the performance of positron emission tomography (PET) component of PET/computed tomography (CT) with new emerging PET/magnetic resonance (MR) of the same vendor. Methods: According to National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU2-07, five separate experimental tests were performed to evaluate the performance of PET scanner of General Electric GE company; SIGNATM model PET/MR and GE Discovery 710 model PET/CT. The main investigated aspects were spatial resolution, sensitivity, scatter fraction, count rate performance, image quality, count loss and random events correction accuracy. Results: The findings of this study demonstrated superior sensitivity (~ 4 folds) of PET scanner in PET/MR compared to PET/CT system. Image quality test exhibited higher contrast in PET/MR (~ 9%) compared with PET/CT. The scatter fraction of PET/MR was 43.4% at noise equivalent count rate (NECR) peak of 218 kcps and the corresponding activity concentration was 17.7 kBq/cc. Whereas the scatter fraction of PET/CT was found as 39.2% at NECR peak of 72 kcps and activity concentration of 24.3 kBq/cc. The percentage error of the random event correction accuracy was 3.4% and 3.1% in PET/MR and PET/CT, respectively. Conclusion: It was concluded that PET/MR system is about 4 times more sensitive than PET/CT, and the contrast of hot lesions in PET/MR was ~ 9% higher than PET/CT. These outcomes also emphasize the possibility to achieve excellent clinical PET images with low administered dose and/or a short acquisition time in PET/MR.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Collected from