HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Daube-Witherspoon, M. E. Articles by Sossi, V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Daube-Witherspoon, M. E. Articles by Sossi, V.

PET Performance Measurements Using the NEMA NU 2-2001 Standard

¹ Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
² CTI PET Systems, Knoxville, Tennessee
³ Picker International, Cleveland, Ohio
⁴ Philips Medical Systems, Milpitas, California
⁵ Philips Medical Systems, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
⁶ Siemens Medical Systems, Hoffman Estates, Illinois
⁷ General Electric Medical Systems, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
⁸ Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington
⁹ Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

The NU 2-1994 standard document for PET performance measurements has recently been updated. The updated document, NU 2-2001, includes revised measurements for spatial resolution, intrinsic scatter fraction, sensitivity, counting rate performance, and accuracy of count loss and randoms corrections. The revised measurements are designed to allow testing of dedicated PET systems in both 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional modes as well as coincidence gamma cameras, conditions not considered in the original NU 2-1994 standard. In addition, the updated measurements strive toward being more representative of clinical studies, in particular, whole-body imaging. Methods: Performance measurements following the NU 2-1994 and NU 2-2001 standards were performed on several different PET scanners. Differences between the procedures and resulting performance characteristics, as well as the rationale for these changes, were noted. Results: Spatial resolution is measured with a point source in all 3 directions, rather than a line source, as specified previously. For the measurements of intrinsic scatter fraction, sensitivity, and counting rate performance, a 70-cm line source is now specified, instead of a 19-cm-long cylindric phantom. The longer configuration permits measurement of these performance characteristics over the entire axial field of view of all current PET scanners and incorporates the effects of activity outside the scanner. A measurement of image quality has been added in an effort to measure overall image quality under clinically realistic conditions. This measurement replaces the individual measurements of uniformity and of the accuracy of corrections for attenuation and scatter. Conclusion: The changes from the NU 2-1994 standard to the NU 2-2001 standard strive toward establishing relevance with clinical studies. The tests in the updated standard also are, in general, simpler and less time-consuming to perform than those in the NU 2-1994 standard.

Key Words: PET • performance measurements

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. S. Karp, S. Surti, M. E. Daube-Witherspoon, and G. Muehllehner Benefit of Time-of-Flight in PET: Experimental and Clinical Results J. Nucl. Med., March 1, 2008; 49(3): 462 - 470. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. El Fakhri, P. A. Santos, R. D. Badawi, C. H. Holdsworth, A. D. Van Den Abbeele, and M. F. Kijewski Impact of Acquisition Geometry, Image Processing, and Patient Size on Lesion Detection in Whole-Body 18F-FDG PET J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2007; 48(12): 1951 - 1960. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. L. Goertzen, J. Y. Suk, and C. J. Thompson Imaging of Weak-Source Distributions in LSO-Based Small-Animal PET Scanners J. Nucl. Med., October 1, 2007; 48(10): 1692 - 1698. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. S. Kim, J. S. Lee, K. C. Im, S. J. Kim, S.-Y. Kim, D. S. Lee, and D. H. Moon Performance Measurement of the microPET Focus 120 Scanner J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2007; 48(9): 1527 - 1535. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. C. Watson, M. E. Casey, B. Bendriem, J. P. Carney, D. W. Townsend, S. Eberl, S. Meikle, and F. P. DiFilippo Optimizing Injected Dose in Clinical PET by Accurately Modeling the Counting-Rate Response Functions Specific to Individual Patient Scans J. Nucl. Med., November 1, 2005; 46(11): 1825 - 1834. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Surti and J. S. Karp Imaging Characteristics of a 3-Dimensional GSO Whole-Body PET Camera J. Nucl. Med., June 1, 2004; 45(6): 1040 - 1049. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. E. Erdi, S. A. Nehmeh, T. Mulnix, J. L. Humm, and C. C. Watson PET Performance Measurements for an LSO-Based Combined PET/CT Scanner Using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU 2-2001 Standard J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2004; 45(5): 813 - 821. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. C. Watson, M. E. Casey, L. Eriksson, T. Mulnix, D. Adams, and B. Bendriem NEMA NU 2 Performance Tests for Scanners with Intrinsic Radioactivity J. Nucl. Med., May 1, 2004; 45(5): 822 - 826. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. S. Karp, S. Surti, M. E. Daube-Witherspoon, R. Freifelder, C. A. Cardi, L.-E. Adam, K. Bilger, and G. Muehllehner Performance of a Brain PET Camera Based on Anger-Logic Gadolinium Oxyorthosilicate Detectors J. Nucl. Med., August 1, 2003; 44(8): 1340 - 1349. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]