Powered by LatticeGrid

Search Enter term and hit return. Use '*' for as a wildcard.
Willowson KP, Tapner M, The QI, Bailey DL, Willowson KP, Tapner MJ, Ahmadzadehfar H, Amthauer H, Großer OS, Arbizu J, Martí-Climent JM, Rodriguez-Fraile M, Attarwala AA, Glatting G, Molina-Duran F, Bagni O, Filippi L, Benard F, Celler A, Bonutti F, Botta F, Ferrari M, Boucek JA, Francis R, Bourgeois AC, Bradley YC, Pasciak AS, Buchholz HG, Miederer M, Büsing KA, Schönberg SO, Carlier T, Eugene T, Cervo M, Moore SC, Civollani S, Pettinato C, Conti M, Craig AJ, Flux GD, Cremonesi M, D’Andrea M, Iaccarino G, Strigari L, D’Arienzo M, D’Asseler Y, Lambert B, Di Martino F, Doss M, Duan H, Hoffmann M, Flamen P, Vanderlinden B, Fletcher AM, Fourkal E, Freeman LM, Geatti O, Goedicke A, Habito CM, Ouyang J, Hallam A, Morgan DG, Heard S, Leek F, Holm S, Mortensen J, de Nijs R, Hooker CA, Jeans SP, Julyan PJ, Kabasakal L, Tanyildizi H, Tanyildizi H, Kappadath SC, Siman W, Lassmann M, Schlögl S, Law MW, Lee VH, Ng SC, Lhommel R, Lodge MA, Luster M, McGowan DR, McLamb B, Kaiser HJ, Mottaghy FM, Mulder RU, Judy P, Stone JR, Lopez A, Munk OL, Staanum PF, Muzaffar R, Osman MM, Nijran KS, Towey DJ, O’Keefe GJ, Pooley RA, McKinney JM, Rausch IF, Reindl M, Sheikh A, Song N, Srinivas SM, Weir G, Yu N, Bailey DL
A multicentre comparison of quantitative 90Y PET/CT for dosimetric purposes after radioembolization with resin microspheres: The QUEST Phantom Study
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging (2015) 42:1202-1222.
PURPOSE: To investigate and compare the quantitative accuracy of (90)Y imaging across different generation PET/CT scanners, for the purpose of dosimetry after radioembolization with resin microspheres. METHODS: A strict experimental and imaging protocol was followed by 47 international sites using the NEMA 2007/IEC 2008 PET body phantom with an 8-to-1 sphere-to-background ratio of (90)Y solution. The phantom was imaged over a 7-day period (activity ranging from 0.5 to 3.0 GBq) and all reconstructed data were analysed at a core laboratory for consistent processing. Quantitative accuracy was assessed through measures of total phantom activity, activity concentration in background and hot spheres, misplaced counts in a nonradioactive insert, and background variability. RESULTS: Of the 69 scanners assessed, 37 had both time-of-flight (ToF) and resolution recovery (RR) capability. These current generation scanners from GE, Philips and Siemens could reconstruct background concentration measures to within 10% of true values over the evaluated range, with greater deviations on the Philips systems at low count rates, and demonstrated typical partial volume effects on hot sphere recovery, which dominated spheres of diameter <20 mm. For spheres >20 mm in diameter, activity concentrations were consistently underestimated by about 20%. Non-ToF scanners from GE Healthcare and Siemens were capable of producing accurate measures, but with inferior quantitative recovery compared with ToF systems. CONCLUSION: Current generation ToF scanners can consistently reconstruct (90)Y activity concentrations, but they underestimate activity concentrations in small structures (
Publication Date: 2015-07-01.
PMCID: 4480824
Last updated on Saturday, August 22, 2020