Performance evaluation of the small-animal PET scanner ClairvivoPET using NEMA NU 4-2008 Standards

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of ClairvivoPET using NEMA NU4 standards. The ClairvivoPET incorporates a LYSO dual depth-of-interaction detector system with 151 mm axial field of view (FOV). Spatial resolution, sensitivity, counting rate capabilities, and image quality were evaluated using NEMA NU4-2008 standards. Normal mouse imaging was also performed for 10 min after intravenous injection of (18)F(-)-NaF. Data were compared with 19 other preclinical PET scanners. Spatial resolution measured using full width at half maximum on FBP-ramp reconstructed images was 2.16 mm at radial offset 5 mm of the axial centre FOV. The maximum absolute sensitivity for a point source at the FOV centre was 8.72%. Peak noise equivalent counting rate (NECR) was 415 kcps at 14.6 MBq ml(-1). The uniformity with the image-quality phantom was 4.62%. Spillover ratios in the images of air and water filled chambers were 0.19 and 0.06, respectively. Our results were comparable with the 19 other preclinical PET scanners based on NEMA NU4 standards, with excellent sensitivity because of the large FOV. The ClairvivoPET with iterative reconstruction algorithm also provided sufficient visualization of the mouse spine. The high sensitivity and resolution of the ClairvivoPET scanner provided high quality images for preclinical studies.

[1]  Hongdi Li,et al.  Engineering and Performance (NEMA and Animal) of a Lower-Cost Higher-Resolution Animal PET/CT Scanner Using Photomultiplier-Quadrant-Sharing Detectors , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  P K Marsden,et al.  Developments in component-based normalization for 3D PET. , 1999, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  Keishi Kitamura,et al.  Performance Evaluation of a New Dedicated Breast PET Scanner Using NEMA NU4-2008 Standards , 2014, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[4]  Luyao Wang,et al.  Performance evaluation of the Trans-PET® BioCaliburn® LH system: a large FOV small-animal PET system. , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  Qinan Bao,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the Inveon Dedicated PET Preclinical Tomograph Based on the NEMA NU-4 Standards , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[6]  T. Spinks,et al.  Quantitative PET and SPECT performance characteristics of the Albira Trimodal pre-clinical tomograph , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[7]  Michel Defrise,et al.  Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3-D PET data , 1997, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  R. Fontaine,et al.  Imaging performance of LabPET APD-based digital PET scanners for pre-clinical research , 2014, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  H. Zaidi,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the FLEX Triumph X-PET Scanner Using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU-4 Standards , 2010, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Roger Lecomte,et al.  Small-Animal PET: What Is It, and Why Do We Need It?* , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology.

[11]  Hiroyuki Kudo,et al.  Optimal relaxation parameters of DRAMA (dynamic RAMLA) aiming at one-pass image reconstruction for 3D-PET , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  P. Major,et al.  National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU-4 Performance Evaluation of the PET Component of the NanoPET/CT Preclinical PET/CT Scanner , 2011, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[13]  Christer Halldin,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the Small-Animal nanoScan PET/MRI System , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  O. Schober,et al.  Small animal PET in preclinical studies: opportunities and challenges. , 2008, The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology (IAR), [and] Section of the Society of....

[15]  K. Miwa,et al.  Validation of novel calibration scheme with traceable point-like 22Na sources on six types of PET scanners , 2013, Annals of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  Roger Lecomte,et al.  NEMA NU 4-2008 Comparison of Preclinical PET Imaging Systems , 2012, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  D. Pareto,et al.  Comparison of the Performance Evaluation of the MicroPET R4 Scanner According to NEMA Standards NU 4-2008 and NU 2-2001 , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[18]  R Taschereau,et al.  NEMA NU-4 performance evaluation of PETbox4, a high sensitivity dedicated PET preclinical tomograph , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  Martin Gotthardt,et al.  Image-Quality Assessment for Several Positron Emitters Using the NEMA NU 4-2008 Standards in the Siemens Inveon Small-Animal PET Scanner , 2010, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[20]  H. Fukuda,et al.  In Vitro and In Vivo Characterization of 2-Deoxy-2-18F-Fluoro-d-Mannose as a Tumor-Imaging Agent for PET , 2013, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[21]  F Boisson,et al.  NEMA NU 4-2008 validation and applications of the PET-SORTEO Monte Carlo simulations platform for the geometry of the Inveon PET preclinical scanner. , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[22]  H. Kudo,et al.  Derivation and implementation of ordered-subsets algorithms for list-mode PET data , 2005, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2005.

[23]  Sanjiv Sam Gambhir,et al.  AMIDE: a free software tool for multimodality medical image analysis. , 2003, Molecular imaging.

[24]  Keishi Kitamura,et al.  Performance evaluation of a high-sensitivity large-aperture small-animal PET scanner: ClairvivoPET , 2008, Annals of nuclear medicine.

[25]  Jurgen Seidel,et al.  Performance evaluation of the GE healthcare eXplore VISTA dual-ring small-animal PET scanner. , 2006, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.