The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology (핵의학기술)

The Korean Society of Nuclear Medicine Technology (대한핵의학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Image Comparative Evaluation by PET/CT Equipment Using Phantom

팬텀을 활용한 PET/CT 장비 별 영상 비교 평가

  • Moo-Jin Jeong (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Jun-Chul Ham (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Yong-Hoon Choi (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Young-Kag Bahn (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Han-Sang Lim (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System) ;
  • Jae-Sam Kim (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University Health System)
  • 정무진 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 함준철 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 최용훈 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 반영각 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 임한상 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과) ;
  • 김재삼 (연세의료원 세브란스병원 핵의학과)
  • Received : 2024.03.25
  • Accepted : 2024.04.29
  • Published : 2024.05.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: This study aims to identify SUV, SNR, spatial resolution, and axial uniformity under the same reconstruction conditions and to find out the differences between equipment models. Materials and Methods: The equipment was GE's Discovery 600, 710, IQ, MI(GE Healthcare, USA), and the Phantom used ACR(American College of Radiology) Flangeless Esser Phantom and PET/SPECT Performance Phantom. The PET/SPECT Performance Phantom injected 18F-FDG at a concentration of 3.8 kBq/mL, and the ACR Flangeless Esser Phantom made the conditions for Hot Spot and Background activity for 4 : 1. Image evaluation was compared and evaluated for SUV, SNR, spatial resolution, and axial uniformity with the same reconstruction that added SharpIR of VPHD. Results: The SUVmax showed a difference up to 4.6% with an average of 2.71, 2.35, 1.89, and 1.43 from Hot Spot 1 to 4, and the SUVmean showed a difference up to 4.7% with 2.06, 1.75, 1.49, and 1.27. There was a difference up to 5% between equipment, and there was no significant difference between both SUVmax and SUVmean. SNR showed a difference up to 0.04 with an average of 0.37, 0.26, 0.18, and 0.11. FWHM showed a difference up to 0.27. Lastly, COV of axial uniformity was up to 0.018. Conclusion: SUV showed differences within 5% between equipment and showed no significant difference. This is considered to be used as basic data that can be used for the development and replacement of equipment because it has the advantage of being able to observe with a large number of equipment.

Keywords

References

  1. Kang KW, KOH's NUCLEAR MEDICINE. 4th edition. Seoul: Korea Medical Book Publishing Company; 2019. p. 3.
  2. The Korea Food and Drug Administration. Guideline for testing PET/CT stability and performance evaluation. The Korea Food and Drug Administration. 2015. Korea.
  3. American College of Radiology. ACR Nuclear Medicine Accreditation Program Phantom Testing. 2023. USA.
  4. Moon AR, Lee H, Kwak IS, Choi SW, Suk JD. Evaluation of Reasonable 18F-FDG Injected Dose for Maintaining the Image Quality in 3D WB PET/CT. J Nucl Med Technol. 2011;15(2):36-40.
  5. Kim WH, Go HS, Lee JE, Kim HS, Ryu JK et al. The Comparison Evaluation of SUV Using Different CT Devices in PET/CT Scans. J Nucl Med Technol. 2014;18(1):10-18.
  6. Kim TY, Lim JJ, Lee HJ, Kim HJ, Kim JH et al. Assessment and Comparison of SUVs of Three Different PET/CT Scanners. J Nucl Med Technol. 2011;15(1):34-38.