The impact of reconstruction algorithms and time of flight information on PET/CT image quality

1. Budinger TF. Time-of-flight positron emission tomography: Status relative to conventional PET. J Nucl Med 1983; 24: 73-8.Search in Google Scholar

2. Boellaard R, Krak NC, Hoekstra OS, Adriaan A. Effects of noise, image resolution, and ROI. J Nucl Med 2004; 45: 1519-27.Search in Google Scholar

3. Cherry SR, Sorenson JA, Phelphs ME. Physics in nuclear medicine. Michigan: Saunders; 2003. p. 253-97.Search in Google Scholar

4. Conti M. Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2011; 38: 1147-57.10.1007/s00259-010-1711-y21229244Search in Google Scholar

5. Quality assurance for PET and PET/CT systems. IAEA human health series no.1. Vienna: IAEA; 2009. p. 2-70.Search in Google Scholar

6. Saha GB. Basics of PET imaging. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 59-80.Search in Google Scholar

7. Powsner RA, Powsner ER. Essential nuclear medicine physics. Oxford: Blackwell publishing; 2006. p. 116-7.10.1002/9780470752890Search in Google Scholar

8. Moses WW. Recent advances and future advances in time-of-flight PET. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2007; 580: 919-24.10.1016/j.nima.2007.06.038208438818836513Search in Google Scholar

9. Conti M. State of the art and challenges of time-of-flight PET. Physica Medica 2008; 25: 1-11.10.1016/j.ejmp.2008.10.00119101188Search in Google Scholar

10. Karp JS, Suleman S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. Benefit of time-of-flight in PET: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med 2008; 49: 462-70.10.2967/jnumed.107.044834263971718287269Search in Google Scholar

11. Lois C, Jakoby BW, Long MJ, Hubner KF, Barker DW, Townsend DW. An assessment of the impact of incorporating Time-of-Flight (TOF) information into clinical PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1-20.10.2967/jnumed.109.068098281851820080882Search in Google Scholar

12. Kadrmas DJ, Casey ME, Conti M, Jakoby BW, Lois C, Towsend DW. Impact of time of-flight on PET tumor detection. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 1315-23.10.2967/jnumed.109.063016278627219617317Search in Google Scholar

13. Casey ME. Point spread function reconstruction in PET. Knoxville, USA: Siemens Medical Solutions, Inc; 2007. p. 1-7.Search in Google Scholar

14. Chang JK, Laforest R. Evaluation of the HD and HD+TOF reconstructions for Siemens’ Biograph-mCT TOF PET scanner. Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC), 2011 IEEE. Valencia; 23-29 October 2011. p. 4131-4. DOI: 10.1109/NSSMIC.2011.6153787Search in Google Scholar

15. Korpar S, Dolenec R, Križan P, Pestotnik R, Stanovnik A. Study of TOF PET using Cherenkov light. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2012; 654: 532-8.10.1016/j.nima.2011.06.035Search in Google Scholar

16. Akamatsu G, Ishikawa K, Mitsumoto K, Taniguchi T, Ohya N, Baba S, et al. Improvement in PET/CT Image Quality with a Combination of Point-Spread Function and Time-of-Flight in Relation to Reconstruction Parameters. J Nucl Med 2012; 53: 1-7.10.2967/jnumed.112.10386122952340Search in Google Scholar

17. Martí-Climent JM, Prieto E, Domínguez-Prado I, García-Velloso MJ, Rodríguez-Fraile M, Arbizu J, et al. Contribution of time of flight and point spread function modeling to the performance characteristics of the PET/CT Biograph mCT scanner. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2012; 32: 1-9.Search in Google Scholar

18. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA standards publication NU-2-2001. Performance measurements of positron emission tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2001. p. 1-39.Search in Google Scholar

19. Prieto E, Martí-Climent JM, Arbizu J, Garrastachu P, Domínguez I, Quincoces G, et al. Evaluation of spatial resolution of a PET scanner through the simulation and experimental measurement of the recovery coefficient. Comput Biol Med 2010; 40: 75-80.10.1016/j.compbiomed.2009.11.00219959163Search in Google Scholar

20. Lodge MA, Rahmin A, Wahl RL. A practical, automated quality assurance method for measuring spatial resolution in pet. J Nucl Med 2009; 50: 1307-14.10.2967/jnumed.108.060079307594519617324Search in Google Scholar

21. Skretting A. A method for on-site measurement of the effective statial resolution in PET image volumes reconstructed with OSEM and gaussian post-filters. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 2010; 139: 195-8.10.1093/rpd/ncq01920164108Search in Google Scholar

22. Jakoby BW, Bercier Y, Conti M, Casey ME, Bendriem B, Towsend DW. Physical and clinical performance of the mCT time-of-flight PET/CT scanner. Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 2375-89.10.1088/0031-9155/56/8/00421427485Search in Google Scholar

23. Daube-Witherspoon ME, Karp JS, Casey ME, DiFilippo FP, Hines H, Muehllehner G, et al. PET Performance Measurements Using the NEMA NU 2-2001 Standard. J Nucl Med 2002; 43: 1398-409.Search in Google Scholar