EANM guidelines for PET-CT and PET-MR routine quality control

Performance characteristics of the 5-ring GE Discovery MI PET/CT scanner using AAPM TG-126 report

AIM

To report on the performance characteristics of the 5-ring GE Discovery MI PET/CT systems using the AAPM TG-126 report and compare these results to NEMA NU 2-2012 where applicable.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TG-126 testing was performed on two GE 5-Rings Discovery MI scanners. Tests performed included spatial resolution, PET/CT image-registration accuracy, sensitivity, count rate performance, accuracy of corrections, image contrast, scatter/attenuation correction, and image uniformity. All acquired data were analyzed using scanner console or free software tools as described by TG-126 and the results were then compared to published NEMA NU 2-2012 values.

RESULTS

Both scanners gave similar resolution results for TG-126 and NEMA NU 2-2012 and were within manufacturer specifications. Image-registration accuracy between PET and CT using our clinical protocol showed excellent results with values ≤1 mm. Sensitivity using TG-126 was 19.43 cps/kBq while for NEMA the value was 20.73 cps/kBq. The peak noise-equivalent counting rate was 2174 kcps at 63.1 kBq/mL and is not comparable to NEMA NU 2-2012 due to differences in phantoms and methods used to measure and calculate this parameter. The accuracy of corrections for count losses for TG-126 were expressed in SUV values and found to be within 10% of the expected SUV measurement of 1. Image contrast and scatter/attenuation correction using the TG-126 method gave acceptable results. Image uniformity assessment resulted in values within the recommended ± 5% limits.

CONCLUSION

These results show that the 5-ring GE Discovery MI PET/CT scanner testing using TG-126 is reproducible and has similar results to NEMA NU 2-2012 tests where applicable. We hope these results start to form the basis to compare PET/CT systems using TG-126.

Prediction of clinically significant prostate cancer by [68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT: a potential tool for selecting patients for active surveillance

PURPOSE

In our study, our aim was to investigate the role of [68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET /CT imaging in the diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) (ISUP GG 2 and higher) in patients initially diagnosed with ISUP GG 1 and 2 after prostate biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 147 patient records in whom [68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging was performed preoperatively. All patients were initially diagnosed with ISUP GG 1 and 2 PCa by biopsy. Final pathology reports were obtained after radical prostatectomy. The [68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT images were evaluated to determine the PRIMARY score. Patients' mpMRI-PIRADS scores were also recorded when available and analyzed in correlation with the pathology results.

RESULTS

For the 114 patients scored using PRIMARY, 19 out of 37 patients with scores of 1 and 2 (51%) were diagnosed with csPCa. Of the 77 patients with PRIMARY scores between 3 and 5, 64 (83%) had csPCa. Notably, every patient with a PRIMARY score of 5 had csPCa. PRIMARY scoring had a sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 58%, with a positive predictive value of 83%. A moderate correlation was observed between PRIMARY scores and ISUP GG (Rho = 0.54, p < 0.001). In contrast, the PIRADS score displayed a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 25% respectively, with a positive predictive value of 68%. No substantial correlation was found between PIRADS and ISUP GG. Statistical analysis revealed a significant correlation between PRIMARY and ISUP GG (p < 0.001), but not between PIRADS and ISUP GG (p = 0.281). Comparatively, PRIMARY scoring was significantly more reliable than PIRADS scoring in identifying csPCa.

CONCLUSION

[68 Ga]Ga-PSMA-11 PET/CT imaging is promising for distinguishing high-risk prostate cancer patients from those apt for active surveillance, potentially aiding in the identification of csPCa.

Operational and Performance Experience with uMI550 Digital PET-CT during Routine Quality Control Procedures

Introduction  The quality control (QC) procedures for positron emission tomography (PET) scanners are covered by National Electrical Manufacturers Association and International Electrotechnical Commission. QC must be carried out at regular intervals according to the specifications of the scanner manufacturer. Daily and weekly QC plays a valuable role in monitoring positron emission tomography (PET) scanner performance changes. This study shares operational and performance experience of QC procedures that do not require a radioactive Ge-68 source to perform daily QC and experience with fluorodeoxyglucose F18 ( 18 F-FDG) as a substitute for germanium-68/sodium-22 (Ge-68/Na-22) source for weekly QC. Method  This study was performed on an uMI550 digital positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scanner. In this scanner daily QC checks system temperature and humidity, system count rate, data link status, and voltage. QC was performed at the console control, the position of the scanner table was in the home position pulled out from the gantry, and the room was closed during the quick QC. Weekly full QC check items include look-up table drift, energy drift, time-of-flight status, C-map status, temperature and humidity, and voltage. Weekly full QC was performed with a 18 F-FDG source in a rod phantom source. Results  Over 200 daily QC tests without a radioactive source Ge-68 phantom and 50 full weekly QC tests using a 18 F-FDG rod phantom were performed with this scanner according to the manufacturer's instructions and a test report was generated. No daily QC errors or warnings were observed during this period. Conclusion  The new approach for the daily PET QC does not expose operators to radiation. This translates into commercial and operational merits with consistent performance and results. Implications for Practice  Reduction in radiation exposure to operating staff during QC procedure in PET-CT scanner.

Enhancing Interoperability and Harmonisation of Nuclear Medicine Image Data and Associated Clinical Data

Nuclear imaging techniques such as positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) in combination with computed tomography (CT) are established imaging modalities in clinical practice, particularly for oncological problems. Due to a multitude of manufacturers, different measurement protocols, local demographic or clinical workflow variations as well as various available reconstruction and analysis software, very heterogeneous datasets are generated. This review article examines the current state of interoperability and harmonisation of image data and related clinical data in the field of nuclear medicine. Various approaches and standards to improve data compatibility and integration are discussed. These include, for example, structured clinical history, standardisation of image acquisition and reconstruction as well as standardised preparation of image data for evaluation. Approaches to improve data acquisition, storage and analysis will be presented. Furthermore, approaches are presented to prepare the datasets in such a way that they become usable for projects applying artificial intelligence (AI) (machine learning, deep learning, etc.). This review article concludes with an outlook on future developments and trends related to AI in nuclear medicine, including a brief research of commercial solutions.

Clinical use of positron emission tomography for radiotherapy planning - Medical physics considerations

PET/CT imaging plays an increasing role in radiotherapy treatment planning. The aim of this article was to identify the major use cases and technical as well as medical physics challenges during integration of these data into treatment planning. Dedicated aspects, such as (i) PET/CT-based radiotherapy simulation, (ii) PET-based target volume delineation, (iii) functional avoidance to optimized organ-at-risk sparing and (iv) functionally adapted individualized radiotherapy are discussed in this article. Furthermore, medical physics aspects to be taken into account are summarized and presented in form of check-lists.

A Practical Quality Assurance Procedure for Data Acquisitions in Preclinical Simultaneous PET/MR Systems

The availability of preclinical simultaneous PET/MR imaging systems has been increasing in recent years. Therefore, this technique is progressively moving from the hands of pure physicists towards those of scientists more involved in pharmacology and biology. Unfortunately, these combined scanners can be prone to artefacts and deviation of their characteristics under the influence of external factors or mutual interference between subsystems. This may compromise the image quality as well as the quantitative aspects of PET and MR data. Hence, quality assurance is crucial to avoid loss of animals and experiments. A possible risk to the acceptance of quality control by preclinical teams is that the complexity and duration of this quality control are increased by the addition of MR and PET tests. To avoid this issue, we have selected over the past 5 years, simple tests that can be easily and quickly performed each day before starting an animal PET/MR acquisition. These tests can be performed by the person in charge of the experiment even if this person has a limited expertise in instrumentation and performance evaluation. In addition to these daily tests, other tests are suggested for an advanced system follow-up at a lower frequency. In the present paper, the proposed tests are sorted by periodicity from daily to annual. Besides, we have selected test materials that are available at moderate cost either commercially or through 3D printing.