Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Practical guide for implementing hybrid PET/MR clinical service: lessons learned from our experience

  • Published:
Abdominal Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging, until recently, have been performed on separate PET and MR systems with varying temporal delay between the two acquisitions. The interpretation of these two separately acquired studies requires cognitive fusion by radiologists/nuclear medicine physicians or dedicated and challenging post-processing. Recent advances in hardware and software with introduction of hybrid PET/MR systems have made it possible to acquire the PET and MR images simultaneously or near simultaneously. This review article serves as a road-map for clinical implementation of hybrid PET/MR systems and briefly discusses hardware systems, the personnel needs, safety and quality issues, and reimbursement topics based on experience at NYU Langone Medical Center and Cleveland Clinic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm258700.html

  2. http://www.medgadget.com/2014/08/ges-new-signa-petmr-with-time-of-flight-tech-under-review-by-fda.html

  3. http://www3.gehealthcare.com/en/products/categories/molecular_imaging/pet_ct_and_mr_trimodality_imaging#tabs/tab8F8D8C24FA804C47AC2348D98A4F1971

  4. Gold, LS et al. Imaging Techniques for Treatment Evaluation for Metastatic Breast Cancer (Internet). Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2014 Oct. Report No.: 14-EHC044-EF

  5. Buchbender C, et al. (2012) Oncologic PET/MRI, part 1: tumors of the brain, head and neck, chest, abdomen and pelvis. J Nucl Med. 53(6):928–938. doi:10.2967/jnumed.112.105338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/nca-decision-memo.aspx?NCAId=263&NcaName=Positron+Emission+Tomography+(FDG)+for+Solid+Tumors&TimeFrame=7&DocType=All&bc=AQAAIAAACAAAAA%3d%3d&

  7. Catalano OA, et al. (2013) Clinical impact of PET/MR imaging in patients with cancer undergoing same-day PET/CT: initial experience in 134 patients—a hypothesis-generating exploratory study. Radiology 269(3):857–869. doi:10.1148/radiol.13131306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Drzezga A (2012) First clinical experience with integrated whole-body PET/MR: comparison to PET/CT in patients with oncologic diagnoses. J Nucl Med. 53(6):845–855. doi:10.2967/jnumed.111.098608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Moy L, et al. (2010) Role of fusion of prone FDG-PET and magnetic resonance imaging of the breasts in the evaluation of breast cancer. Breast J. 16(4):369–376. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2010.00927.x

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hersh Chandarana.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Parikh, N., Friedman, K.P., Shah, S.N. et al. Practical guide for implementing hybrid PET/MR clinical service: lessons learned from our experience. Abdom Imaging 40, 1366–1373 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0444-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-015-0444-6

Keywords

Navigation