A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Physical performance of adaptive axial FOV PET scanners with a sparse detector block rings or a checkerboard configuration. | LitMetric

Using Monte-Carlo simulations, we evaluated the physical performance of a hypothetical state-of-the-art clinical PET scanner with adaptive axial field-of-view (AFOV) based on the validated GATE model of the Siemens Biograph VisionPET/CT scanner.Vision consists of 16 compact PET rings, each consisting of 152 mini-blocks of 5 × 5 Lutetium Oxyorthosilicate crystals (3.2 × 3.2 × 20 mm). The Vision 25.6 cm AFOV was extended by adopting (i) a sparse mini-block ring (SBR) configuration of 49.6 cm AFOV, with all mini-block rings interleaved with 16 mm axial gaps, or (ii) a sparse mini-block checkerboard (SCB) configuration of 51.2 cm AFOV, with all mini-blocks interleaved with gaps of 16 mm (transaxial) × 16 mm (axial) width in checkerboard pattern. For sparse configurations, a 'limited' continuous bed motion (limited-CBM) acquisition was employed to extend AFOVs by 2.9 cm. Spatial resolution, sensitivity, image quality (IQ), NECR and scatter fraction were assessed per NEMA NU2-2012.All IQ phantom spheres were distinguishable with all configurations. SBR and SCB percent contrast recovery (% CR) and background variability (% BV) were similar (-value > 0.05). Compared to Vision, SBR and SCB %CRs were similar (-values > 0.05). However, SBR and SCB %BVs were deteriorated by 30% and 26% respectively (-values < 0.05). SBR, SCB and Vision exhibited system sensitivities of 16.6, 16.8, and 15.8 kcps MBq, NECRs of 311 kcps @35 kBq cc, 266 kcps @25.8 kBq cc, and 260 kcps @27.8 kBq cc, and scatter fractions of 31.2%, 32.4%, and 32.6%, respectively. SBR and SCB exhibited a smoother sensitivity reduction and noise enhancement rate from AFOV center to its edges. SBR and SCB attained comparable spatial resolution in all directions (-value > 0.05), yet, up to 1.5 mm worse than Vision (-values < 0.05).The proposed sparse configurations may offer a clinically adoptable solution for cost-effective adaptive AFOV PET with either highly-sensitive or long-AFOV acquisitions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ac6aa1DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

sbr scb
24
physical performance
8
adaptive axial
8
sparse mini-block
8
sparse configurations
8
spatial resolution
8
-value 005
8
-values 005
8
005 sbr
8
sbr
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!