Cited by 7Medical Imaging Techniques and ApplicationsRadiation Detection and Scintillator TechnologiesCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics

NEMA NU 2-2018 performance measurements of Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT system

Prenosil, GA, Hentschel, M, Fürstner, M, Sari, H, Rominger, A·2021·Nuklearmedizin - NuclearMedicine

Abstract

Ziel/Aim We evaluated the Biograph Vision Quadra (Siemens Healthineers) total-body PET/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2018 standard for comparison with other PET/CT systems. The new PET/CT system builds on the technology of the SiPM-based Biograph Vision 600 (Siemens Healthineers) and has an axial field of view (AFOV) of 106 cm. This setup offers full coverage of a human torso together with a much higher imaging sensitivity. Methodik/Methods Spatial resolution was measured with a Na-22 point source. Scatter fraction, noise equivalent count rate (NECR), sensitivity, correction accuracies, CT co-registration accuracy, image quality and time-of flight (TOF) resolution were measured with F-18 sources. Two image quality measurements were performed with foreground to background ratios of 4 to 1 and 8 to 1, both with TOF and PSF reconstruction (TrueX TOF). Image reconstruction used a maximum ring difference (MRD) of 85. For all other measurements, MRDs of 85 and 322 were used. Ergebnisse/Results The radial, tangential and axial spatial resolutions were 3.3, 3.4 and 3.8 mm, as measured with MRD 85. Sensitivities in MRD 85 and MRD 322 modes were 83.4 cps/kBq and 176.0 cps/kBq, and the NECRs at peak were 1.641 kcps and 3.018 kcps, both at 28.3 kBq/ml. Scatter fraction at peak NECR was 36.5 % and 37.0 %, respectively. The TOF resolution was 225 ps for MRD 85 and 227 ps for MRD 322. Image contrast recovery was between 74.4 to 86.9 % for 4:1 and between 77.6 to 92.6 % for 8:1 contras…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1055/s-0041-1726744

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent PET systems with extra-large axial FOV >25 cm have potential to substantially reduce required acquisition times.

    “This becomes especially evident with recent PET systems with extra-large axial FOV of >25 cm and their potential to substantially reduce required acquisition times [47,149,150].”

    From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [149]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prenosil, G., Hentschel, M., Fürstner, M., Sari, H., & Rominger, A.
Affiliations
  • Inselspital Bern, Nuklearmedizin
  • University Hospital of Bern (CH)
Venue
Nuklearmedizin - NuclearMedicine
Published
2021-04
Volume
60
ISSN
  • 0029-5566 (ISSN-L)
  • 2567-6407
OpenAlex
W3161213375
Cited by
7
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3
FWCI
1.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Nuklearmedizin - NuclearMedicine (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Radiation › Radiation Detection and Scintillator Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Keywords
PET/CT, spatial resolution, noise equivalent count rate, detector sensitivity, scatter fraction, time-of-flight resolution, image quality, contrast recovery, axial field of view

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review