Feasibility of state of the art PET/CT systems performance harmonisation

Purpose The objective of this study was to explore the feasibility of harmonising performance for PET/CT systems equipped with time-of-flight (ToF) and resolution modelling/point spread function (PSF) technologies. A second aim was producing a working prototype of new harmonising criteria with higher contrast recoveries than current EARL standards using various SUV metrics. Methods Four PET/CT systems with both ToF and PSF capabilities from three major vendors were used to acquire and reconstruct images of the NEMA NU2-2007 body phantom filled conforming EANM EARL guidelines. A total of 15 reconstruction parameter sets of varying pixel size, post filtering and reconstruction type, with three different acquisition durations were used to compare the quantitative performance of the systems. A target range for recovery curves was established such that it would accommodate the highest matching recoveries from all investigated systems. These updated criteria were validated on 18 additional scanners from 16 sites in order to demonstrate the scanners' ability to meet the new target range. Results Each of the four systems was found to be capable of producing harmonising reconstructions with similar recovery curves. The five reconstruction parameter sets producing harmonising results significantly increased SUVmean (25%) and SUVmax (26%) contrast recoveries compared with current EARL specifications. Additional prospective validation performed on 18 scanners from 16 EARL accredited sites demonstrated the feasibility of updated harmonising specifications. SUVpeak was found to significantly reduce the variability in quantitative results while producing lower recoveries in smaller ( Conclusions Harmonising PET/CT systems with ToF and PSF technologies from different vendors was found to be feasible. The harmonisation of such systems would require an update to the current multicentre accreditation program EARL in order to accommodate higher recoveries. SUVpeak should be further investigated as a noise resistant alternative quantitative metric to SUVmax

Feasibility of state of the art PET/CT systems performance harmonisation

Purpose The objective of this study was to explore the feasibility of harmonising performance for PET/CT systems equipped with time-of-flight (ToF) and resolution modelling/point spread function (PSF) technologies. A second aim was producing a working prototype of new harmonising criteria with higher contrast recoveries than current EARL standards using various SUV metrics. Methods Four PET/CT systems with both ToF and PSF capabilities from three major vendors were used to acquire and reconstruct images of the NEMA NU2-2007 body phantom filled conforming EANM EARL guidelines. A total of 15 reconstruction parameter sets of varying pixel size, post filtering and reconstruction type, with three different acquisition durations were used to compare the quantitative performance of the systems. A target range for recovery curves was established such that it would accommodate the highest matching recoveries from all investigated systems. These updated criteria were validated on 18 additional scanners from 16 sites in order to demonstrate the scanners' ability to meet the new target range. Results Each of the four systems was found to be capable of producing harmonising reconstructions with similar recovery curves. The five reconstruction parameter sets producing harmonising results significantly increased SUVmean (25%) and SUVmax (26%) contrast recoveries compared with current EARL specifications. Additional prospective validation performed on 18 scanners from 16 EARL accredited sites demonstrated the feasibility of updated harmonising specifications. SUVpeak was found to significantly reduce the variability in quantitative results while producing lower recoveries in smaller (<= 17 mm diameter) sphere sizes. Conclusions Harmonising PET/CT systems with ToF and PSF technologies from different vendors was found to be feasible. The harmonisation of such systems would require an update to the current multicentre accreditation program EARL in order to accommodate higher recoveries. SUVpeak should be further investigated as a noise resistant alternative quantitative metric to SUVmax

An OCR system for the Unified Northern Alphabet

Partanen N, Rießler M. An OCR system for the Unified Northern Alphabet. In: Pirinen TA, Kaalep H-J, Tyers FM, Association for Computational Linguistics, eds. The fifth International Workshop on Computational Linguistics for Uralic Languages. Tartu: Association for Computational Linguistics; 2019: 77-89.This paper presents experiments done in order to build a functional OCR model for the Unified Northern Alphabet. This writing system was used between 1931 and 1937 for 16 (Uralic and non-Uralic) minority languages spoken in the Soviet Union. The character accuracy of the developed model reaches more than 98% and clearly shows cross-linguistic applicability. The tests described here therefore also include general guidelines for the amount of training data needed to boot-strap an OCR system under similar conditions

Harmonisation of PET/CT contrast recovery performance for brain studies

Purpose In order to achieve comparability of image quality, harmonisation of PET system performance is imperative. In this study, prototype harmonisation criteria for PET brain studies were developed.Methods Twelve clinical PET/CT systems (4 GE, 4 Philips, 4 Siemens, including SiPM-based "digital" systems) were used to acquire 30-min PET scans of a Hoffman 3D Brain phantom filled with similar to 33 kBq.mL(-1) [F-18]FDG. Scan data were reconstructed using various reconstruction settings. The images were rigidly coregistered to a template (voxel size 1.17 x 1.17 x 2.00 mm(3)) onto which several volumes of interest (VOIs) were defined. Recovery coefficients (RC) and grey matter to white matter ratios (GMWMr) were derived for eroded (denoted in the text by subscript e) and non-eroded grey (GM) and white (WM) matter VOIs as well as a mid-phantom cold spot (VOIcold) and VOIs from the Hammers atlas. In addition, left-right hemisphere differences and voxel-by-voxel differences compared to a reference image were assessed.Results Systematic differences were observed for reconstructions with and without point-spread-function modelling (PSFON and PSFOFF, respectively). Normalising to image-derived activity, upper and lower limits ensuring image comparability were as follows: for PSFON, RCGMe = [0.97-1.01] and GMWMr(e) = [3.51-3.91] for eroded VOI and RCGM = [0.78-0.83] and GMWMr = [1.77-2.06] for non-eroded VOI, and for PSFOFF, RCGMe = [0.92-0.99] and GMWMr(e) = [3.14-3.68] for eroded VOI and RCGM = [0.75-0.81] and GMWMr = [1.72-1.95] for non-eroded VOI.Conclusions To achieve inter-scanner comparability, we propose selecting reconstruction settings based on RCGMe and GMWMr(e) as specified in "Results". These proposed standards should be tested prospectively to validate and/or refine the harmonisation criteria.Neuro Imaging Researc

EANM/EARL FDG-PET/CT accreditation - summary results from the first 200 accredited imaging systems.

PURPOSE:From 2010 until July 2016, the EANM Research Ltd. (EARL) FDG-PET/CT accreditation program has collected over 2500 phantom datasets from approximately 200 systems and 150 imaging sites worldwide. The objective of this study is to report the findings and impact of the accreditation program on the participating PET/CT systems. METHODS:To obtain and maintain EARL accredited status, sites were required to complete and submit two phantom scans - calibration quality control (CalQC), using a uniform cylindrical phantom and image quality control (IQQC), using a NEMA NU2-2007 body phantom. Average volumetric SUV bias and SUV recovery coefficients (RC) were calculated and the data evaluated on the basis of quality control (QC) type, approval status, PET/CT system manufacturer and submission order. RESULTS:SUV bias in 5% (n = 96) of all CalQC submissions (n = 1816) exceeded 10%. After corrective actions following EARL feedback, sites achieved 100% compliance within EARL specifications. 30% (n = 1381) of SUVmean and 23% (n = 1095) of SUVmax sphere recoveries from IQQC submissions failed to meet EARL accreditation criteria while after accreditation, failure rate decreased to 12% (n = 360) and 9% (n = 254), respectively. Most systems demonstrated longitudinal SUV bias reproducibility within ±5%, while RC values remained stable and generally within ±10% for the four largest and ±20% for the two smallest spheres. CONCLUSIONS:Regardless of manufacturer or model, all investigated systems are able to comply with the EARL specifications. Within the EARL accreditation program, gross PET/CT calibration errors are successfully identified and longitudinal variability in PET/CT performances reduced. The program demonstrates that a harmonising accreditation procedure is feasible and achievable

Harmonisation of PET/CT contrast recovery performance for brain studies

PURPOSE: In order to achieve comparability of image quality, harmonisation of PET system performance is imperative. In this study, prototype harmonisation criteria for PET brain studies were developed. METHODS: Twelve clinical PET/CT systems (4 GE, 4 Philips, 4 Siemens, including SiPM-based "digital" systems) were used to acquire 30-min PET scans of a Hoffman 3D Brain phantom filled with ~ 33 kBq·mL-1 [18F]FDG. Scan data were reconstructed using various reconstruction settings. The images were rigidly coregistered to a template (voxel size 1.17 × 1.17 × 2.00 mm3) onto which several volumes of interest (VOIs) were defined. Recovery coefficients (RC) and grey matter to white matter ratios (GMWMr) were derived for eroded (denoted in the text by subscript e) and non-eroded grey (GM) and white (WM) matter VOIs as well as a mid-phantom cold spot (VOIcold) and VOIs from the Hammers atlas. In addition, left-right hemisphere differences and voxel-by-voxel differences compared to a reference image were assessed. RESULTS: Systematic differences were observed for reconstructions with and without point-spread-function modelling (PSFON and PSFOFF, respectively). Normalising to image-derived activity, upper and lower limits ensuring image comparability were as follows: for PSFON, RCGMe = [0.97-1.01] and GMWMre = [3.51-3.91] for eroded VOI and RCGM = [0.78-0.83] and GMWMr = [1.77-2.06] for non-eroded VOI, and for PSFOFF, RCGMe = [0.92-0.99] and GMWMre = [3.14-3.68] for eroded VOI and RCGM = [0.75-0.81] and GMWMr = [1.72-1.95] for non-eroded VOI. CONCLUSIONS: To achieve inter-scanner comparability, we propose selecting reconstruction settings based on RCGMe and GMWMre as specified in "Results". These proposed standards should be tested prospectively to validate and/or refine the harmonisation criteria