Quality control for quantitative multicenter whole-body PET/MR studies: A NEMA image quality phantom study with three current PET/MR systems
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: Integrated positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) systems derive the PET attenuation correction (AC) from dedicated MR sequences. While MR‐AC performs reasonably well in clinical patient imaging, it may fail for phantom‐based quality control (QC). The authors assess the applicability of different protocols for PET QC in multicenter PET/MR imaging. Methods: The National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2 2007 image quality phantom was imaged on three combined PET/MR systems: a Philips Ingenuity TF PET/MR, a Siemens Biograph mMR, and a GE SIGNA PET/MR (prototype) system. The phantom was filled according to the EANM FDG‐PET/CT guideline 1.0 and scanned for 5 min over 1 bed. Two MR‐AC imaging protocols were tested: standard clinical procedures and a dedicated protocol for phantom tests. Depending on the system, the dedicated phantom protocol employs a two‐class (water and air) segmentation of the MR data or a CT‐based template. Differences in attenuation‐ and SUV recovery coefficients (RC) are reported. PET/CT‐based simulations were performed to simulate the various artifacts seen in the AC maps (μ‐map) and their impact on the accuracy of phantom‐based QC. Results: Clinical MR‐AC protocols caused substantial errors and artifacts in the AC maps, resulting in underestimations of the reconstructed PET activity of up to 27%, depending on the PET/MR system. Using dedicated phantom MR‐AC protocols, PET bias was reduced to −8%. Mean and max SUV RC met EARL multicenter PET performance specifications for most contrast objects, but only when using the dedicated phantom protocol. Simulations confirmed the bias in experimental data to be caused by incorrect AC maps resulting from the use of clinical MR‐AC protocols. Conclusions: Phantom‐based quality control of PET/MR systems in a multicenter, multivendor setting may be performed with sufficient accuracy, but only when dedicated phantom acquisition and processing protocols are used for attenuation correction.
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
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.
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?
MR-based attenuation correction (MR-AC) in PET/MRI relies on vendor-dependent MR sequences to automatically segment the body into three or four compartments (air, bone, soft tissue, fat).
“In contrast, MR-based attenuation correction (MR-AC) in PET/MRI relies on different, vendor-dependent MR sequences that are used to automatically segment the body into three or four compartments (air, bone, soft tissue, and fat) [58].”
From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [58]
Section 2.B (Clinical protocol) describes vendor-dependent MR sequences that segment images into three or four tissue classes. The listed classes are air, lungs, soft tissue, and—for two systems—fat, not bone; the Introduction also says the implemented approaches do not include bones or substitute them with soft tissue. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredInter-vendor differences in MR-AC maps can lead to SUV differences in phantom spheres of 10-20%.
“In such phantoms, inter-vendor differences in MR-AC maps [61] can lead to SUV differences in phantom spheres of 10–20% [58].”
From Influences on PET Quantification and Interpretation (2022) · cites this paper as [58]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0
Boellaard, R., Delgado-Bolton, R., Oyen, W. J. G., Giammarile, F., Tatsch, K., Eschner, W., Verzijlbergen, F. J., Barrington, S. F., Pike, L. C., Weber, W. A., et al. (2015) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2961-x · Cited by 3,303 · see citing works
Self-citationFDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0
Boellaard, R., O’Doherty, M. J., Weber, W., Mottaghy, F. M., Lonsdale, M. N., Stroobants, S. G., Oyen, W. J. G., Kotzerke, J., Hoekstra, O. S., Pruim, J., et al. (2009) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-009-1297-4 · Cited by 1,329 · see citing works
Self-citationPerformance 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 870 · see citing works
Self-citationMartínez-Möller, A., Souvatzoglou, M., Delso, G., Bundschuh, R. A., Chefd’hotel, C., Ziegler, S. I., Navab, N., Schwaiger, M., & Nekolla, S. G. (2009) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.108.054726 · Cited by 712 · see citing works
Self-citationDrzezga, A. E., Souvatzoglou, M., Eiber, M., Beer, A. J., Fürst, S., Martínez-Möller, A., Nekolla, S. G., Ziegler, S. I., Ganter, C., Rummeny, E. J., et al. (2012) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.098608 · Cited by 506 · see citing works
Design and performance evaluation of a whole-body Ingenuity TF PET–MRI system
Zaidi, H., Ojha, N., Morich, M. A., Griesmer, J. J., Hu, Z., Maniawski, P. J., Ratib, O. M., Izquierdo‐Garcia, D., Fayad, Z. A., & Shao, L. (2011) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/56/10/013 · Cited by 400 · see citing works
Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI.
Pichler, B. J., Judenhofer, M. S., Catana, C., Walton, J. H., Kneilling, M., Nutt, R. E., Siegel, S. B., Claussen, C. D., & Cherry, S. R. (2006) · PubMed · Cited by 396 · see citing works
Attenuation Correction Synthesis for Hybrid PET-MR Scanners: Application to Brain Studies
Burgos, N., Cardoso, M. J., Thielemans, K., Marc Modat, A., Pedemonte, S., Dickson, J. C., Barnes, A., Ahmed, R. M., Mahoney, C., Schott, J. M., et al. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2014.2340135 · Cited by 365 · see citing works
Nuyts, J. L., Dupont, P. J., Stroobants, S. G., Benninck, R., Mortelmans, L., & Suetens, P. (1999) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.774167 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
Towards quantitative PET/MRI: a review of MR-based attenuation correction techniques
Hofmann, M., Pichler, B. J., Schölkopf, B., & Beyer, T. (2008) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-008-1007-7 · Cited by 343 · see citing works
Self-citationMethod for transforming CT images for attenuation correction in PET/CT imaging
Carney, J., Townsend, D. W., Rappoport, V., & Bendriem, B. (2006) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.2174132 · Cited by 271 · see citing works
PET/CT scanners: A hardware approach to image fusion
Townsend, D. W., Beyer, T., & Blodgett, T. M. (2003) · Seminars in Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.1053/snuc.2003.127314 · Cited by 263 · see citing works
Self-citationSamarin, A., Burger, C., Wollenweber, S. D., Crook, D. W., Burger, I. A., Schmid, D. T., von Schulthess, G. K., & Kuhn, F. P. (2012) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-012-2113-0 · Cited by 251 · see citing works
Zero TE MR bone imaging in the head
Wiesinger, F., Sacolick, L. I., Menini, A., Kaushik, S. S., Ahn, S., Veit‐Haibach, P., Delso, G., & Shanbhag, D. (2015) · Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · doi:10.1002/mrm.25545 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Self-citationSimultaneous Reconstruction of Activity and Attenuation for PET/MR
Salomon, A., Goedicke, A., Schweizer, B., Aach, T., & Schulz, V. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/tmi.2010.2095464 · Cited by 174 · see citing works
PET/MR Images Acquired with a Compact MR-compatible PET Detector in a 7-T Magnet
Judenhofer, M. S., Catana, C., Swann, B. K., et al. (2007) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2443061756 · Cited by 173 · see citing works
Wiesmüller, M., Quick, H. H., Navalpakkam, B. K., et al. (2012) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-012-2249-y · Cited by 138 · see citing works
Self-citationEiber, M., Takei, T., Souvatzoglou, M., Mayerhoefer, M. E., Fürst, S., Gaertner, F. C., Loeffelbein, D. J., Rummeny, E. J., Ziegler, S. I., Schwaiger, M., et al. (2013) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.113.123646 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
PET/MRI hybrid imaging: devices and initial results
Pichler, B. J., Judenhofer, M. S., & Wehrl, H. F. (2008) · European Radiology · doi:10.1007/s00330-008-0857-5 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Navalpakkam, B. K., Braun, H., Kuwert, T., & Quick, H. H. (2013) · Investigative Radiology · doi:10.1097/rli.0b013e318283292f · Cited by 123 · see citing works
Self-citationDetection and quantification of focal uptake in head and neck tumours: 18F-FDG PET/MR versus PET/CT
Varoquaux, A. D., Rager, O., Poncet, A., Delattre, B. M. A., Ratib, O. M., Becker, C. D., Dulguerov, P., Dulguerov, N., Zaidi, H., & Becker, M. (2013) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2580-y · Cited by 109 · see citing works
Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Hybrid Imaging
Quick, H. H., von Gall, C., Zeilinger, M. G., et al. (2013) · Investigative Radiology · doi:10.1097/rli.0b013e3182845a08 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Self-citationWollenweber, S. D., Ambwani, S., Lonn, A. H. R., Shanbhag, D., Thiruvenkadam, S. R., Kaushik, S. S., Mullick, R. K., Qian, H., Delso, G., & Wiesinger, F. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/tns.2013.2278759 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Self-citationKalemis, A., Delattre, B. M. A., & Heinzer-Schweizer, S. (2012) · Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10334-012-0330-y · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Accurate PET/MR Quantification Using Time of Flight MLAA Image Reconstruction
Boellaard, R., Hofman, M. B. M., Hoekstra, O. S., & Lammertsma, A. A. (2014) · Molecular Imaging and Biology · doi:10.1007/s11307-013-0716-x · Cited by 87 · see citing works
Self-citationAznar, M. C., Sersar, R., Saabye, J., Ladefoged, C. N., Andersen, F. L., Rasmussen, J. H., Löfgren, J., & Beyer, T. (2014) · European Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2014.03.022 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Self-citationJudenhofer, M. S., Pichler, B. J., & Cherry, S. R. (2004) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/50/1/003 · Cited by 66 · see citing works
MR-Based Attenuation Correction Using Ultrashort-Echo-Time Pulse Sequences in Dementia Patients
Cabello, J., Lukas, M., Förster, S., et al. (2015) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.114.146308 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Attenuation correction for PET/MR: Problems, novel approaches and practical solutions
Martínez-Möller, A., & Nekolla, S. G. (2012) · Zeitschrift für Medizinische Physik · doi:10.1016/j.zemedi.2012.08.003 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
Ziegler, S., Jakoby, B., Braun, H., Paulus, D. H., & Quick, H. H. (2015) · EJNMMI Physics · doi:10.1186/s40658-015-0122-3 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Self-citationPET/MR in prostate cancer: technical aspects and potential diagnostic value
Souvatzoglou, M., Eiber, M. J., Martínez-Möller, A., Fürst, S., Holzapfel, K., Maurer, T., Ziegler, S. I., Nekolla, S. G., Schwaiger, M., & Beer, A. J. (2013) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-013-2445-4 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Non-small-cell lung cancer resectability: diagnostic value of PET/MR
Fraioli, F., Screaton, N. J., Janes, S. M., et al. (2014) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-014-2873-9 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Systematic Evaluation of Phantom Fluids for Simultaneous PET/MR Hybrid Imaging
Ziegler, S., Braun, H., Ritt, P., Hocke, C., Kuwert, T., & Quick, H. H. (2013) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.112.116376 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Self-citationBlumhagen, J. O., Braun, H., Ladebeck, R., Fenchel, M., Faul, D. D., Scheffler, K., & Quick, H. H. (2014) · Medical Physics · doi:10.1118/1.4861097 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationAttenuation Correction Synthesis for Hybrid PET-MR Scanners
Burgos, N., Cardoso, M. J., Modat, M., et al. (2013) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40811-3_19 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
Larsson, A., Johansson, A., Axelsson, J., et al. (2012) · Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10334-012-0339-2 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
PET/MRI in cancer patients: first experiences and vision from Copenhagen
Kjær, A., Loft, A., Law, I. G., et al. (2012) · Magnetic Resonance Materials in Physics Biology and Medicine · doi:10.1007/s10334-012-0357-0 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Davison, H., ter Voert, E. E. G. W., Barbosa, F. D. G., Veit‐Haibach, P., & Delso, G. (2015) · Investigative Radiology · doi:10.1097/rli.0000000000000146 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Self-citationA Clinical and Experimental Comparison of Time of Flight PET/MRI and PET/CT Systems
Oprea‐Lager, D. E., Yaqub, M. M., den Bos, I. C. P.-V., Reinhard, R., van Moorselaar, R. J. A., van den Eertwegh, A. J. M., Hoekstra, O. S., Lammertsma, A. A., & Boellaard, R. (2015) · Molecular Imaging and Biology · doi:10.1007/s11307-015-0826-8 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Self-citationAnalysis of the effects of errors in attenuation maps on PET quantitation in TOF PET
Ahn, S., Cheng, L., & Manjeshwar, R. M. (2014) · IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC) · doi:10.1109/nssmic.2014.7430781 · Cited by 6 · see citing works
Monte Carlo study of scattered and random coincidences for MADPET-4
Omidvari, N., Cabello, J., Schneider, F. R., et al. (2015) · EJNMMI Physics · doi:10.1186/2197-7364-2-s1-a57 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Aide, N., Lasnon, C., Veit-Haibach, P., Sera, T., Sattler, B., & Boellaard, R. (2017) · European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging · doi:10.1007/s00259-017-3740-2 · Cited by 344 · see citing works
Self-citationInfluences on PET Quantification and Interpretation
Rogasch, J. M. M., Hofheinz, F., van Heek, L., Voltin, C.-A., Boellaard, R., & Kobe, C. (2022) · Diagnostics · doi:10.3390/diagnostics12020451 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
“In such phantoms, inter-vendor differences in MR-AC maps [61] can lead to SUV differences in phantom spheres of 10–20% [58].”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- Authors
- Boellaard, R., Rausch, I., Beyer, T., Delso, G., Yaqub, M., Quick, H. H., & Sattler, B.
- Affiliations
- European Association of Nuclear Medicine (AT)
- Medical University of Vienna (AT)
- University Hospital Zurich (CH)
- Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL)
- Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (DE)
- University Hospital Leipzig (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Boellaard, Ronald
- ORCID
- Venue
- Medical Physics
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2015-09-22
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 5961-5969
- ISSN
- 0094-2405 (ISSN-L)
- 2473-4209
- OpenAlex
- W1940721824
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 5.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- pure.amsterdamumc.nl
- Licence
- Locations
- Medical Physics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Amsterdam UMC (VU Amsterdam) - Institutional Repository (publishedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- EANM Research Limited
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging
- Keywords
- PET/MR, quality control, MR-based attenuation correction, standardized uptake value, FDG-PET
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Quality Control, Phantoms, Imaging, Positron-Emission Tomography, Whole Body Imaging, Multimodal Imaging
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
