SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Comparison of quantitative [<sup>11</sup>C]PE2I brain PET studies between an integrated PET/MR and a stand-alone PET system.

Phys Med · 2023-12-02

DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2023.103185PMID: 38042064

Check source for accessJournal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

PET/MR systems demanded great efforts for accurate attenuation correction (AC) but differences in technology, geometry and hardware attenuation may also affect quantitative results. Dedicated PET systems using transmission-based AC are regarded as the gold standard for quantitative brain PET. The study aim was to investigate the agreement between quantitative PET outcomes from a PET/MR scanner against a stand-alone PET system. Nine patients with Parkinsonism underwent two 80-min dynamic PET scans with the dopamine transporter ligand [11C]PE2I. Images were reconstructed with resolution-matched settings using 68Ge-transmission (stand-alone PET), and zero-echo-time MR (PET/MR) scans for AC. Non-displaceable binding potential (BPND) and relative delivery (R1) were evaluated using volumes of interest and voxel-wise analysis. Correlations between systems were high (r ≥ 0.85) for both quantitative outcome parameters in all brain regions. Striatal BPND was significantly lower on PET/MR than on stand-alone PET (-7%). R1 was significantly overestimated in posterior cortical regions (9%) and underestimated in striatal (-9%) and limbic areas (-6%). The voxel-wise evaluation revealed that the MR-safe headphones caused a negative bias in both parametric BPND and R1 images. Additionally, a significant positive bias of R1 was found in the auditory cortex, most likely due to the acoustic background noise during MR imaging. The relative bias of the quantitative [11C]PE2I PET data acquired from a SIGNA PET/MR system was in the same order as the expected test-retest reproducibility of [11C]PE2I BPND and R1, compared to a stand-alone ECAT PET scanner. MR headphones and background noise are potential sources of error in functional PET/MR studies.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.