Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34626239›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2021

Performance evaluation of a PET insert for preclinical MRI in stand-alone PET and simultaneous PET-MRI modes.

Gaelle Emvalomenos, Sofie Trajanovska, Binh T T Pham, Peter Doughty, Jerome Burnet, Isabelle Smith, Ruslan Garipov, Marie-Claude Gregoire, Nana Sunn, John McGrath and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Evaluation of a PET Insert for Trimodal Imaging: A Step Toward PET/MRI-Guided Focused Ultrasound.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gaelle EmvalomenosSydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia. gaelle.emvalomenos@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2133-8997
Sofie TrajanovskaSydney Imaging Core Research Facility, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Binh T T PhamSydney Imaging Core Research Facility, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Peter DoughtyMR Solutions, Guildford, UK.
Jerome BurnetMR Solutions, Guildford, UK.
Isabelle SmithSchool of Physics, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Ruslan GaripovMR Solutions, Guildford, UK.
Marie-Claude GregoireBrain and Mind Centre, The University of Sydney, 100 Mallett Street, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
Nana SunnSydney Imaging Core Research Facility, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
John McGrathMR Solutions, Guildford, UK.
Steven R MeikleSydney School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2050, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the performance of a preclinical PET insert in three configurations: as a stand-alone unit outside the MRI bore, inside the bore of a cryogen-free 3T MRI and, finally, while performing simultaneous PET/MRI studies.

methodsThe PET insert consists of two rings of six detectors, each detector comprising 8 × 12 SiPMs reading out dual offset layers of pixelated LYSO crystals with a 1.4-mm pitch. The inner diameter is 60 mm, transaxial field of view (FoV) 40 mm and axial FoV 98 mm. Evaluation was based on NEMA NU 4-2008 guidelines with appropriate modifications. Spatial resolution and sensitivity were measured inside and outside the MR bore. Image quality, count rate and quantitative performance were measured in all three configurations. The effect of temperature stability on PET sensitivity during fast spin echo sequences was also evaluated. B

resultsPeak absolute sensitivity was 10.15% with an energy window of 250-750 keV. Absolute sensitivity values outside and inside the MR bore with MR idle agreed to within 0.1%. Outside the MR bore, spatial resolution was 1.21/1.59 mm FWHM (radial/tangential) 5 mm from the centre of the FoV which compared well with 1.19/1.26 mm FWHM inside the MR bore. There were no substantial differences between all three scan configurations in terms of peak NEC rate (175 kcps at 17 MBq), scatter or random fractions. Uniformity and recovery coefficients were also consistent between scanning modes. B

conclusionsWe conclude that the performance of the PET insert and MRI system is not significantly affected by the scanning mode.

Indexed as

NEMAPET insertPET/MRIPreclinical PETSimultaneous PET/MRI

Identifiers

PMID34626239
PMCPMC8502182
OpenAlexW3166012261

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.