• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.31-36
• /
• 2017

Purpose Recently, the performance of PET/CT scanner has been improved and various techniques have been developed to increase the image quality such as Sensitivity and Resolution. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of Q.Clear (a fully convergent iterative reconstruction) technique of GE Discovery IQ equipment to enhance the image quality. Materials and Methods All scans were acquired by Discovery IQ (GE Healthcare, MI, USA). In NEMA IEC Body Phantom test, Background to Hot-sphere (10 mm, 13 mm, 17 mm, 22 mm) ratio was 1:4 and scan time was 3 minutes. The images were reconstructed by VPHDs (VUE Point High-Definition + SharpIR) and Q.Clear to evaluate each Contrast. We injected 18F-FDG 187 M㏃ to PET/SPECT Performance Phantom. And then it was scanned for 4 minutes to evaluate Resolution and Uniformity. T-test statistical analysis was performed on SUVmax of small lesions less than 2 cm in 100 clinical patients regardless of disease type. Results In the NEMA IEC Body Phantom, the Contrast was $63.6{\pm}5.7%$ (VPHDs) and $75{\pm}4.8%$ (Q.Clear). In the PET/SPECT Performance Phantom, the Resolution was 9.2 mm (VPHDs) and 7.3 mm (Q.Clear). Uniformity of Q.Clear was 10.8% better than VPHDs. T-test statistic of the clinical patients showed a significant difference of p value of 0.021. Conclusion Both the phantom test and the clinical results showed that the quality of the image was improved in Q.Clear was applied. The SUVmax was highly measured in Q.Clear and the lesions were clearly distinguished visually. Therefore Q.Clear can be useful in various aspects such as dose-reduction, patients evaluation and image analysis.

• The Korean Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.71-79
• /
• 2024

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 SUV_max 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 SUV_mean 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 SUV_max and SUV_mean. 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.