Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39853786›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2025

Realistic total-body J-PET geometry optimization: Monte Carlo study.

Jakub Baran, Wojciech Krzemien, Szymon Parzych, Lech Raczyński, Mateusz Bała, Aurélien Coussat, Neha Chug, Eryk Czerwiński, Catalina Oana Curceanu, Meysam Dadgar and 24 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

34 authors.

Jakub BaranFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Wojciech KrzemienTotal-Body Jagiellonian-PET Laboratory, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Szymon ParzychFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Lech RaczyńskiDepartment of Complex Systems, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland.
Mateusz BałaDepartment of Complex Systems, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland.
Aurélien CoussatFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Neha ChugFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Eryk CzerwińskiFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Catalina Oana CurceanuINFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy.
Meysam DadgarFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Kamil DulskiFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Kavya EliyanFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Jan GajewskiCyclotron Centre Bronowice, Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland.
Aleksander GajosFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Beatrix C HiesmayrFaculty of Physics, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Krzysztof KacprzakFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Łukasz KapłonFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Konrad KlimaszewskiDepartment of Complex Systems, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland.
Grzegorz KorcylFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Tomasz KozikFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Deepak KumarFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Szymon NiedźwieckiFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Dominik PanekFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Elena Perez Del RioFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Antoni RucińskiCyclotron Centre Bronowice, Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, Poland.
Sushil SharmaFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
ShivaniFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Roman Y ShopaDepartment of Complex Systems, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland.
Magdalena SkurzokFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Ewa StępieńFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Faranak TayefiardebiliFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Keyvan TayefiardebiliFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.
Wojciech WiślickiDepartment of Complex Systems, National Centre for Nuclear Research, Otwock-Świerk, Poland.
Paweł MoskalFaculty of Physics, Astronomy and Applied Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.

Funding

EU Horizon 824093Foundation for Polish Sciences TEAM POIR.04.04.00-00-4204/17Jagiellonian University CRP/0641.221.2020Ministry of Science and Education for Poland IAL/SP/596235/2023Ministry of Science and Education for Poland SPUB/SP/490528/2021National Centre Science for Poland 2019/35/B/ST2/03562National Centre Science for Poland 2020/38/E/ST2/00112National Centre Science for Poland 2021/42/A/ST2/00423National Centre Science for Poland 2021/43/B/ST2/02150
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTotal-body (TB) Positron Emission Tomography (PET) is one of the most promising medical diagnostics modalities, opening new perspectives for personalized medicine, low-dose imaging, multi-organ dynamic imaging or kinetic modeling. The high sensitivity provided by total-body technology can be advantageous for novel tomography methods like positronium imaging, demanding the registration of triple coincidences. Currently, state-of-the-art PET scanners use inorganic scintillators. However, the high acquisition cost reduces the accessibility of TB PET technology. Several efforts are ongoing to mitigate this problem. Among the alternatives, the Jagiellonian PET (J-PET) technology, based on axially arranged plastic scintillator strips, offers a low-cost alternative solution for TB PET. PURPOSE: The work aimed to compare five total-body J-PET geometries with plastic scintillators suitable for multi-organ and positronium tomography as a possible next-generation J-PET scanner design.

methodsWe present comparative studies of performance characteristics of the cost-effective total-body PET scanners using J-PET technology. We investigated in silico five TB scanner geometries, varying the number of rings, scanner radii, and other parameters. Monte Carlo simulations of the anthropomorphic XCAT phantom, the extended 2-m sensitivity line source and positronium sensitivity phantoms were used to assess the performance of the geometries. Two hot spheres were placed in the lungs and in the liver of the XCAT phantom to mimic the pathological changes. We compared the sensitivity profiles and performed quantitative analysis of the reconstructed images by using quality metrics such as contrast recovery coefficient, background variability and root mean squared error. The studies are complemented by the determination of sensitivity for the positronium lifetime tomography and the relative cost analysis of the studied setups.

resultsThe analysis of the reconstructed XCAT images reveals the superiority of the seven-ring scanners over the three-ring setups. However, the three-ring scanners would be approximately 2-3 times cheaper. The peak sensitivity values for two-gamma vary from 20 to 34 cps/kBq and are dominated by the differences in geometrical acceptance of the scanners. The sensitivity curves for the positronium tomography have a similar shape to the two-gamma sensitivity profiles. The peak values are lower compared to the two-gamma cases, from about 20-28 times, with a maximum value of 1.66 cps/kBq. This can be contrasted with the 50-cm one-layer J-PET modular scanner used to perform the first in-vivo positronium imaging with a sensitivity of 0.06 cps/kBq.

conclusionsThe results show the feasibility of multi-organ imaging of all the systems to be considered for the next generation of TB J-PET designs. Among the scanner parameters, the most important ones are related to the axial field-of-view coverage. The two-gamma sensitivity and XCAT image reconstruction analyzes show the advantage of seven-ring scanners. However, the cost of the scintillator materials and SiPMs is more than two times higher for the longer modalities compared to the three-ring solutions. Nevertheless, the relative cost for all the scanners is about 10-4 times lower compared to the cost of the uExplorer. These properties coupled together with J-PET cost-effectiveness and triggerless acquisition mode enabling three-gamma positronium imaging, make the J-PET technology an attractive solution for broad application in clinics.

Indexed as

Monte Carlo MethodPositron-Emission TomographyWhole Body ImagingHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPhantoms, ImagingJ‐PETMonte Carlo simulationsTB PET

Identifiers

PMID39853786
PMCPMC12082756

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.