4.6 Article

A phantom design for assessment of detectability in PET imaging

Journal

MEDICAL PHYSICS
Volume 43, Issue 9, Pages 5051-5062

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1118/1.4960365

Keywords

image quality; positron emission tomography (PET); detection

Funding

  1. GE Healthcare

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The primary clinical role of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is the detection of anomalous regions of 18F-FDG uptake, which are often indicative of malignant lesions. The goal of this work was to create a task-configurable fillable phantom for realistic measurements of detectability in PET imaging. Design goals included simplicity, adjustable feature size, realistic size and contrast levels, and inclusion of a lumpy (i.e., heterogeneous) background. Methods: The detection targets were hollow 3D-printed dodecahedral nylon features. The exostructure sphere-like features created voids in a background of small, solid non-porous plastic (acrylic) spheres inside a fillable tank. The features filled at full concentration while the background concentration was reduced due to filling only between the solid spheres. Results: Multiple iterations of feature size and phantom construction were used to determine a configuration at the limit of detectability for a PET/CT system. A full-scale design used a 20 cm uniform cylinder (head-size) filled with a fixed pattern of features at a contrast of approximately 3:1. Known signal-present and signal-absent PET sub-images were extracted from multiple scans of the same phantom and with detectability in a challenging (i.e., useful) range. These images enabled calculation and comparison of the quantitative observer detectability metrics between scanner designs and image reconstruction methods. The phantom design has several advantages including filling simplicity, wall-less contrast features, the control of the detectability range via feature size, and a clinically realistic lumpy background. Conclusions: This phantom provides a practical method for testing and comparison of lesion detectability as a function of imaging system, acquisition parameters, and image reconstruction methods and parameters. (C) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available