Abstract
Introduction
Integration of positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance (MR) has become a topic of increasing interest to the imaging community over the past two years.
Objectives
In this text, the authors attempt to distinguish facts from fiction concerning such integrated systems. Analysis of existing information of combined imaging on existing brain PET/MR systems and imaging experience with PET-computed tomography (CT) is reviewed. Various types of system integration of PET and MR are discussed with completely independent systems on one hand and completely integrated systems with the possibility of simultaneous data acquisition on the other hand. Furthermore, it is discussed, what simultaneous data acquisition with nuclear imaging systems combined with MR or CT really means, as technical simultaneity may not be relevant in light of the pharmacokinetics of the nuclear tracers used.
Discussion
The authors conclude that combining PET/MR is an interesting research endeavor with uncertain outcome. They argue that, while completely simultaneous brain applications are of research interest immediately, clinical applications do not currently warrant the construction of fully integrated systems. Systems adjacent to each other, where imaging tables are linked with a patient “shuttle” thereby requiring only patient translation but no repositioning, may be a good start to assess the value of integrated PET/MR.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Seo Y, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Technological development and advances in single-photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography. Semin Nucl Med. 2008;38(3):177–98. May.
Hasegawa BH, Gingold EL, Reilly SM, Liew SC, Cann CE. Description of a simultaneous emission-transmission CT system. Proc SPIE. 1990;1231:50–60.
Beyer T, Townsend DW, Brun T, Kinahan PE, Charron M, Roddy R, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nuc Med. 2000;41:1369–79.
Kinahan PE, et al. Attenuation correction for a combined 3D PET/CT scanner. Med Phys. 1998;25:2046–53.
Burger C, Goerres GW, Schoenes S, Buck A, Lonn AHR, von Schulthess GK. PET attenuation coefficients from CT images: experimental evaluation of the transformation of CT- into PET 511 keV attenuation coefficients. Europ J Nucl Med. 2002;29(7):922–7.
Hany TF, Steinert HC, Goerres GW, Buck A, von Schulthess GK. PET diagnostic accuracy: improvement with in-line PET/CT System: initial results. Radiology. 2002;225:575–81.
von Schulthess GK. Cost considerations regarding an integrated CT-PET system. Eur Radiol. 2000;Suppl 3:377–80.
Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, Kamel EM, Korom S, Seifert B, et al. Integrated PET/CT imaging improves staging of non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(25):2500–7.
Czernin J, Allen-Auerbach M, Schelbert HR. Improvements in cancer staging with PET/CT: literature-based evidence as of September 2006. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(Suppl 1):78S–88S. Jan.
Hillner BE, Siegel BA, Liu D, Shields AF, Gareen IF, Hanna L, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry. Clin Oncol. 2008;26(13):2155–61. May 1.
Gambhir SS, Czernin J, Schwimmer J, Silverman DH, Coleman RE, Phelps ME. A tabulated summary of the FDG PET literature. J Nucl Med. 2001;42(5 Suppl):1S–93S. May.
Brix G, Lechel U, Glatting G, Ziegler SI, Münzing W, Müller SP, et al. Radiation exposure of patients undergoing whole-body dual-modality 18F-FDG PET/CT examinations. J Nucl Med. 2005;46(4):608–13. Apr.
Pichler BJ, Judenhofer MS, Catana C, Walton JH, Kneilling M, Nutt RE, et al. Performance test of an LSO-APD detector in a 7-T MRI scanner for simultaneous PET/MRI. J Nucl Med. 2006;47(4):639–47.
Schlemmer HP, Pichler B, Wienhard K, et al. Simultaneous MR/PET for Brain Imaging: first Patient Scans. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(Suppl):152.
Schlemmer HP, Pichler BJ, Schmand M, Burbar Z, Michel C, Ladebeck R, et al. Simultaneous MR/PET imaging of the human brain: a feasibility study. Radiology. 2008;248:1028–35.
Judenhofer MS, Catana C, Swann BK, Siegel SB, Jung WI, Nutt RF, et al. PET/MR images acquired with a compact MR-compatible PET detector in a 7-T magnet. Radiology. 2007;244(3):807–14.
Judenhofer MS, Wehrl HF, Newport DF, Catana C, Siegel SB, Becker M, et al. Simultaneous PET-MRI: a new approach for functional and morphological imaging. Nat Med. 2008;14(4):459–65. Apr.
Beyer T, Weigert M, Quick HH, Pietrzyk U, Vogt F, Palm C, et al. MR-based attenuation correction for torso-PET/MR imaging: pitfalls in mapping MR to CT data. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(6):1142–6.
Zaidi H, Montandon ML, Slosman DO. Attenuation compensation in cerebral 3D PET: effect of the attenuation map on absolute and relative quantitation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31(1):52–63.
Hofmann M, Steinke F, Scheel V, Charpiat G, Farquhar J, Aschoff P, et al. MR-based attenuation correction for PET/MR: a novel approach combining pattern recognition and atlas registration. J Nucl Med. 2008; (in press).
Carroll TJ, Teneggi V, Jobin M, Squassante L, Treyer V, Hany TF, et al. Absolute quantification of cerebral blood flow with magnetic resonance, reproducibility of the method, and comparison with H2(15)O positron emission tomography. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2002;22(9):1149–56. Sep.
Antoch G, Vogt FM, Freudenberg LS, Nazaradeh F, Goehde SC, Barkhausen J, et al. Whole-body dual-modality PET/CT and whole-body MRI for tumor staging in oncology. JAMA. 2003;290(24):3199–206. Dec 24.
Muller-Horvat C, Radny P, Eigentler TK, Schafer J, Pfannenberg C, Horger M, et al. Prospective comparison of the impact on treatment decisions of whole-body magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in patients with metastatic malignant melanoma. Eur J Cancer. 2006;42(3):342–50.
Pfannenberg AC, Aschoff P, Eschmann SM, Plathow C, Eigentler TK, Garbe C, et al. Prospective comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography and whole-body magnetic resonance imaging in staging of advanced malignant melanoma. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43(3):557–64.
Bischof Delaloye A, Carrió I, Cuocolo A, Knapp W, Gourtsoyiannis N, McCall I, et al. White paper of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM) and the European Society of Radiology (ESR) on multimodality imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34(8):1147–51. Aug.
Conflict of interest
GvS is a conlsultant to GE Healthcare and a Board member of Timaq Inc.. HS declares no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
von Schulthess, G.K., Schlemmer, HP.W. A look ahead: PET/MR versus PET/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 36 (Suppl 1), 3–9 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0940-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-008-0940-9