Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 874

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Performance Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner

Open access
Delso, Gaspar, Fürst, Sebastian, Jakoby, Björn, Ladebeck, Ralf, Ganter, Carl, Nekolla, Stephan G., Schwaiger, Markus, Ziegler, Sibylle I.·2011·Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The recently released Biograph mMR is the first commercially available integrated whole-body PET/MR scanner. There are considerable advantages to integrating both modalities in a single scanner that enables truly simultaneous acquisition. However, there are also concerns about the possible degradation of both PET and MR performance in an integrated system. This paper evaluates the performance of the Biograph mMR during independent and simultaneous acquisition of PET and morphologic MR data. METHODS: The NEMA NU 2-2007 protocol was followed for studying the PET performance. The following measurements were performed: spatial resolution; scatter fraction, count losses, and randoms; sensitivity; accuracy of the correction for count losses and randoms; and image quality. The quality control manual of the American College of Radiology was followed for studying the MR performance. The following measurements were performed: geometric accuracy, spatial resolution, low-contrast detectability, signal-to-noise ratio, static field (B(0)) homogeneity, radiofrequency field (B(1)) homogeneity, and radiofrequency noise. RESULTS: An average spatial resolution of 4.3 mm in full width at half maximum was measured at 1 cm offset from the center of the field of view. The system sensitivity was 15.0 kcps/MBq along the center of the scanner. The scatter fraction was 37.9%, and the peak noise-equivalent count rate was 184 kcps at 23.1 kBq/mL. The maximum absolute value of the relative count rate error due to dead-time losses and randoms was 5.5%. The average residual error in scatter and attenuation correction was 12.1%. All MR parameters were within the tolerances defined by the American College of Radiology. B(0) inhomogeneities below 1 ppm were measured in a 120-mm radius. B(1) homogeneity and signal-to-noise ratio were equivalent to those of a standard MR scanner. No radiofrequency interference was detected. CONCLUSION: These results compare favorably with other state-of-the-art PET/CT and PET/MR scanners, indicating that the integration of the PET detectors in the MR scanner and their operation within the magnetic field do not have a perceptible impact on the overall performance. The MR subsystem performs essentially like a standalone system. However, further work is necessary to evaluate the more advanced MR applications, such as functional imaging and spectroscopy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2967/jnumed.111.092726

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 12 references

Cited by

See all 874

Metadata

Authors
Delso, G., Fürst, S., Jakoby, B., Ladebeck, R., Ganter, C., Nekolla, S. G., Schwaiger, M., & Ziegler, S. I.
Venue
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Published
2011-11-11
Volume
52
Issue
12
Pages
1914-1922
ISSN
  • 0161-5505 (ISSN-L)
  • 2159-662X
OpenAlex
W2110338249
Cited by
874
References
12
FWCI
43.89
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 Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2967/jnumed.111.092726
The paper
Delso, G., Fürst, S., Jakoby, B., Ladebeck, R., Ganter, C., Nekolla, S. G., Schwaiger, M., & Ziegler, S. I. (2011). Performance Measurements of the Siemens mMR Integrated Whole-Body PET/MR Scanner. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.111.092726

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.