Improved PET/MRI accuracy by use of static transmission source in empirically derived hardware attenuation correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate quantification of radioactivity, measured by an integrated positron emission tomography (PET) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) system, is still a challenge. One aspect of such a challenge is to correct for the hardware attenuation, such as the patient table and radio frequency (RF) resonators. For PET/MRI systems, computed tomography (CT) is commonly used to produce hardware attenuation correction (AC) maps, by converting Hounsfield units (HU) to a linear attenuation coefficients (LAC) map at the PET energy level 511 keV, using a bilinear model. The model does not address beam hardening, nor higher density materials, which can lead to inaccurate corrections. PURPOSE: In this study, we introduce a transmission-based (TX-based) AC technique with a static Germanium-68 (Ge-68) transmission source to generate hardware AC maps using the PET/MRI system itself, without the need for PET or medical CT scanners. The AC TX-based maps were generated for a homogeneous cylinder, made of acrylic as a validator. The technique thereafter was applied to the patient table and posterior part of an RF-phased array used in cardiovascular PET/MRI imaging. The proposed TX-based, and the CT-based, hardware maps were used in reconstructing PET images of one cardiac patient, and the results were analysed and compared. RESULTS: theoretical value reported in the literature. The PET photon counts were reduced by 8.7 ± 1.1% with the patient table, at the region used in cardiac scans, while the CT-based map, used for correction, over-estimated counts by 4.3 ± 1.3%. Reconstructed in vivo images using TX-based AC hardware maps have shown 4.1 ± 0.9% mean difference compared to those reconstructed images using CT-based AC. CONCLUSIONS: The LAC of the acrylic cylinder measurements using the TX-based technique was in agreement with those in the literature confirming the validity of the technique. The over-estimation of photon counts caused by the CT-based model used for the patient table was improved by the TX-based technique. Therefore, TX-based AC of hardware using the PET/MRI system itself is possible and can produce more accurate images when compared to the CT-based hardware AC in cardiac PET images.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".