Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26501827›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2015

Performance evaluation of the Biograph mCT Flow PET/CT system according to the NEMA NU2-2012 standard.

Ivo Rausch, Jacobo Cal-González, David Dapra, Hans Jürgen Gallowitsch, Peter Lind, Thomas Beyer, Gregory Minear

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Whole-body CD8Nature communications · 2025
    Trial
  2. Attenuation Pre-Correction in Iterative PET Image Reconstruction: What is the Statistical Cost?IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Ligand-based design of [Nature communications · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. A proper protocol for routineEJNMMI physics · 2023
    Article
  14. Direct Patlak Reconstruction of [International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Quantitative [EJNMMI physics · 2022
    Article
  20. Validation ofJournal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ivo RauschQuantitative Imaging and Medical Physics group (QIMP), Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. ivo.rausch@meduniwien.ac.at.
Jacobo Cal-GonzálezQuantitative Imaging and Medical Physics group (QIMP), Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. jacobo.calgonzalez@meduniwien.ac.at.
David DapraUniversitätsklinikum Klagenfurt, Feschnigstraße 11, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria. david.dapra@kabeg.at.
Hans Jürgen GallowitschUniversitätsklinikum Klagenfurt, Feschnigstraße 11, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria. hans.gallowitsch@kabeg.at.
Peter LindUniversitätsklinikum Klagenfurt, Feschnigstraße 11, 9020, Klagenfurt, Austria. peter.lind@kabeg.at.
Thomas BeyerQuantitative Imaging and Medical Physics group (QIMP), Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. thomas.beyer@meduniwien.ac.at.
Gregory MinearDivision of Nuclear Medicine, Universitätsklinikum St. Pölten, Propst Führer-Straße 4, 3100, St. Pölten, Austria. Gregory.Minear@stpoelten.lknoe.at.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of the study is to evaluate the physical performance of a Biograph mCT Flow 64-4R PET/CT system (Siemens Healthcare, Germany) and to compare clinical image quality in step-and-shoot (SS) and continuous table motion (CTM) acquisitions.

methodsThe spatial resolution, sensitivity, count rate curves, and Image Quality (IQ) parameters following the National Electrical Manufactures Association (NEMA) NU2-2012 standard were evaluated. For resolution measurements, an (18)F point source inside a glass capillary tube was used. Sensitivity measurements were based on a 70-cm-long polyethylene tube, filled with 4.5 MBq of FDG. Scatter fraction and count rates were measured using a 70-cm-long polyethylene cylinder with a diameter of 20 cm and a line source (1.04 GBq of FDG) inserted axially into the cylinder 4.5 cm off-centered. A NEMA IQ phantom containing six spheres (10- to 37-mm diameter) was used for the evaluation of the image quality. First, a single-bed scan was acquired (NEMA standard), followed by a two-bed scan (4 min each) of the IQ phantom with the image plane containing the spheres centered in the overlap region of the two bed positions. In addition, a scan of the same region in CTM mode was performed with a table speed of 0.6 mm/s. Furthermore, two patient scans were performed in CTM and SS mode. Image contrasts and patient images were compared between SS and CTM acquisitions.

resultsFull Width Half Maximum (FWHM) of the spatial resolution ranged from 4.3 to 7.8 mm (radial distance 1 to 20 cm). The measured sensitivity was 9.6 kcps/MBq, both at the center of the FOV and 10 cm off-center. The measured noise equivalent count rate (NECR) peak was 185 kcps at 29.0 kBq/ml. The scatter fraction was 33.5 %. Image contrast recovery values (sphere-to-background of 8:1) were between 42 % (10-mm sphere) to 79 % (37-mm sphere). The background variability was between 2.1 and 5.3 % (SS) and between 2.4 and 6.9 % (CTM). No significant difference in image quality was observed between SS and CTM mode.

conclusionsThe spatial resolution, sensitivity, scatter fraction, and count rates were in concordance with the published values for the predecessor system, the Biograph mCT. Contrast recovery values as well as image quality obtained in SS and CTM acquisition modes were similar.

Indexed as

Biograph mCT FlowImage qualityNEMA evaluation

Identifiers

PMID26501827
PMCPMC4883615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.