The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner
Open accessAbstract
Time-of-flight (TOF) measurement capability promises to improve PET image quality. We characterized the physical and clinical PET performance of the first Biograph mCT TOF PET/CT scanner (Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc.) in comparison with its predecessor, the Biograph TruePoint TrueV. In particular, we defined the improvements with TOF. The physical performance was evaluated according to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) NU 2-2007 standard with additional measurements to specifically address the TOF capability. Patient data were analyzed to obtain the clinical performance of the scanner. As expected for the same size crystal detectors, a similar spatial resolution was measured on the mCT as on the TruePoint TrueV. The mCT demonstrated modestly higher sensitivity (increase by 19.7 ± 2.8%) and peak noise equivalent count rate (NECR) (increase by 15.5 ± 5.7%) with similar scatter fractions. The energy, time and spatial resolutions for a varying single count rate of up to 55 Mcps resulted in 11.5 ± 0.2% (FWHM), 527.5 ± 4.9 ps (FWHM) and 4.1 ± 0.0 mm (FWHM), respectively. With the addition of TOF, the mCT also produced substantially higher image contrast recovery and signal-to-noise ratios in a clinically-relevant phantom geometry. The benefits of TOF were clearly demonstrated in representative patient images.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements
Panin, V. Y., Kehren, F., Michel, C., & Casey, M. (2006) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2006.876171 · Cited by 536
Self-citation
Cited by
Performance Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner
Delso, G., Fürst, S., Jakoby, B., Ladebeck, R., Ganter, C., Nekolla, S. G., Schwaiger, M., & Ziegler, S. I. (2011) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.092726 · Cited by 874
Self-citationCherry, S. R., Jones, T., Karp, J. S., Qi, J., Moses, W. W., & Badawi, R. D. (2018) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.116.184028 · Cited by 763
Performance Characteristics of the Digital Biograph Vision PET/CT System
van Sluis, J., de Jong, J., Schaar, J., Noordzij, W., van Snick, P., Dierckx, R., Borra, R., Willemsen, A., & Boellaard, R. (2019) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.118.215418 · Cited by 484
Spencer, B. A., Berg, E., Schmall, J. P., Omidvari, N., Leung, E. K., Abdelhafez, Y. G., Tang, S., Deng, Z., Dong, Y., Lv, Y., et al. (2021) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.250597 · Cited by 403
Studies of a Next-Generation Silicon-Photomultiplier–Based Time-of-Flight PET/CT System
Hsu, D. F. C., Ilan, E., Peterson, W. T., Uribe, J., Lubberink, M., & Levin, C. S. (2017) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.117.189514 · Cited by 241
Metadata
- Authors
- Jakoby, B. W., Bercier, Y., Conti, M., Casey, M. E., Bendriem, B., & Townsend, D. W.
- Venue
- Physics in Medicine and Biology
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2011-03-22
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2375-2389
- ISSN
- 0031-9155 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6560
- OpenAlex
- W2047284752
- Cited by
- 492
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 29.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/004
- The paper
- Jakoby, B. W., Bercier, Y., Conti, M., Casey, M. E., Bendriem, B., & Townsend, D. W. (2011). Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner. Physics in Medicine and Biology. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/004
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.