Advertisement

Abdominal Imaging

, Volume 40, Issue 6, pp 1366–1373 | Cite as

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

  • Nainesh Parikh
  • Kent P. Friedman
  • Shetal N. Shah
  • Hersh ChandaranaEmail author
Article

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.

Keywords

PET/MR Hybrid PET/MR Clinical implementation 

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
  4. 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-EFGoogle Scholar
  5. 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 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 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 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 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 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nainesh Parikh
    • 1
  • Kent P. Friedman
    • 1
  • Shetal N. Shah
    • 2
  • Hersh Chandarana
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyNew York University Langone Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Abdominal Imaging and Nuclear RadiologyCleveland ClinicClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations