The DOI matches its Crossref record; 21 of the 21 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Performance Evaluation of the Inveon Dedicated PET Preclinical Tomograph Based on the NEMA NU-4 Standards
Open accessAbstract
UNLABELLED: The Inveon dedicated PET (DPET) scanner is the latest generation of preclinical PET systems devoted to high-resolution and high-sensitivity murine model imaging. In this study, we report on its performance based on the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) NU-4 standards. METHODS: The Inveon DPET consists of 64 lutetium oxyorthosilicate block detectors arranged in 4 contiguous rings, with a 16.1-cm ring diameter and a 12.7-cm axial length. Each detector block consists of a 20 x 20 lutetium oxyorthosilicate crystal array of 1.51 x 1.51 x 10.0 mm elements. The scintillation light is transmitted to position-sensitive photomultiplier tubes via optical light guides. Energy resolution, spatial resolution, sensitivity, scatter fraction, and counting-rate performance were evaluated. The NEMA NU-4 image-quality phantom and a healthy mouse injected with (18)F-FDG and (18)F(-) were scanned to evaluate the imaging capability of the Inveon DPET. RESULTS: The energy resolution at 511 keV was 14.6% on average for the entire system. In-plane radial and tangential resolutions reconstructed with Fourier rebinning and filtered backprojection algorithms were below 1.8-mm full width at half maximum (FWHM) at the center of the field of view. The radial and tangential resolution remained under 2.0 mm, and the axial resolution remained under 2.5-mm FWHM within the central 4-cm diameter of the field of view. The absolute sensitivity of the system was 9.3% for an energy window of 250-625 keV and a timing window of 3.432 ns. At a 350- to 625-keV energy window and a 3.432-ns timing window, the peak noise equivalent counting rate was 1,670 kcps at 130 MBq for the mouse-sized phantom and 590 kcps at 110 MBq for the rat-sized phantom. The scatter fractions at the same acquisition settings were 7.8% and 17.2% for the mouse- and rat-sized phantoms, respectively. The mouse image-quality phantom results demonstrate that for typical mouse acquisitions, the image quality correlates well with the measured performance parameters in terms of image uniformity, recovery coefficients, attenuation, and scatter corrections. CONCLUSION: The Inveon system, compared with previous generations of preclinical PET systems from the same manufacturer, shows significantly improved energy resolution, sensitivity, axial coverage, and counting-rate capabilities. The performance of the Inveon is suitable for successful murine model imaging experiments.
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
Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data
Hudson, H. M., & Larkin, R. S. (1994) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.363108 · Cited by 3,711
Positron emission tomography provides molecular imaging of biological processes
Phelps, M. E. (2000) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.97.16.9226 · Cited by 1,229
National electrical manufacturers association
(1926) · Journal of the A.I.E.E. · doi:10.1109/jaiee.1926.6537344 · Cited by 860
Analytic 3D image reconstruction using all detected events
Kinahan, P. E., & Rogers, J. G. (1989) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/23.34585 · Cited by 767
Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3-D PET data
Defrise, M., Kinahan, P. E., Townsend, D. W., Michel, C., Sibomana, M., & Newport, D. F. (1997) · IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging · doi:10.1109/42.563660 · Cited by 758
Self-citationHigh-resolution 3D Bayesian image reconstruction using the microPET small-animal scanner
Qi, J., Leahy, R. M., Cherry, S. R., Chatziioannou, A., & Farquhar, T. H. (1998) · Physics in Medicine and Biology · doi:10.1088/0031-9155/43/4/027 · Cited by 635
Self-citationStrother, S. C., Casey, M. E., & Hoffman, E. J. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/23.106715 · Cited by 549
New, faster, image-based scatter correction for 3D PET
Watson, C. C. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science · doi:10.1109/23.873020 · Cited by 519
(2005) · PubMed · Cited by 395
Treatment of axial data in three-dimensional PET.
Daube-Witherspoon, M. E., & Muehllehner, G. (1987) · PubMed · Cited by 357
Cited by
Vaquero, J. J., & Kinahan, P. (2015) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071114-040723 · Cited by 383
Krishnamoorthy, S., Blankemeyer, E., Mollet, P., Surti, S., Van Holen, R., & Karp, J. S. (2018) · Physics in Medicine & Biology · doi:10.1088/1361-6560/aacec3 · Cited by 141
Mirzaei, N., Tang, S. P., Ashworth, S., Coello, C., Plisson, C., Passchier, J., Selvaraj, V., Tyacke, R. J., Nutt, D. J., & Sastre, M. (2016) · Glia · doi:10.1002/glia.22978 · Cited by 82
Lehnert, W., Gregoire, M.-C., Reilhac, A., & Meikle, S. R. (2012) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.032 · Cited by 52
Risk Factors Associated with Canine Heartworm Infection
Selby, L. A., Corwin, R. M., & Hayes, H. M. (1980) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.1980.176.01.33 · Cited by 49
Metadata
- Authors
- Bao, Q., Newport, D., Chen, M., Stout, D. B., & Chatziioannou, A. F.
- Venue
- Journal of Nuclear Medicine
- Publisher
- Society of Nuclear Medicine
- Published
- 2009-02-17
- Volume
- 50
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 401-408
- ISSN
- 0161-5505 (ISSN-L)
- 2159-662X
- OpenAlex
- W2104418792
- Cited by
- 306
- References
- 21
- FWCI
- 18.32
- 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: Performance Evaluation of the Inveon Dedicated PET Preclinical Tomograph Based on the NEMA NU-4 Standards. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2967/jnumed.108.056374
- The paper
- Bao, Q., Newport, D., Chen, M., Stout, D. B., & Chatziioannou, A. F. (2009). Performance Evaluation of the Inveon Dedicated PET Preclinical Tomograph Based on the NEMA NU-4 Standards. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.108.056374
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.