3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification
Abstract Background The low throughout of small animal positron emission tomography (PET) images acquisitions represents a substantial limitation. The aims of this study were (i) to design a low-cost support for simultaneous dynamic PET scanning of two lying rats and (ii) to study its impact on brai...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2023-09-01
|
| Series: | EJNMMI Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-023-01027-9 |
| _version_ | 1827633176062722048 |
|---|---|
| author | Caroline Bouillot Sébastien Daligault Radu Bolbos Nicolas Costes Luc Zimmer |
| author_facet | Caroline Bouillot Sébastien Daligault Radu Bolbos Nicolas Costes Luc Zimmer |
| author_sort | Caroline Bouillot |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The low throughout of small animal positron emission tomography (PET) images acquisitions represents a substantial limitation. The aims of this study were (i) to design a low-cost support for simultaneous dynamic PET scanning of two lying rats and (ii) to study its impact on brain image quantification. Results Accuracy of concentration measurement was 5.5% for one phantom in the field of view, and 5.7% for two phantoms measured simultaneously. Ratio concentration between phantoms showed an error of 6.7% ± 5.1% for Solo upper position, 6.7% ± 3.7% for Solo lower position, 5.9% ± 4.3% for Duo upper position, and 7.4% ± 6% for Duo lower position 6.7% for separated measures, and 6.6% for simultaneous measures. In vivo distribution profiles showed no difference between solo and duo uptakes. Region of Interest quantification in the whole brain showed 4.4% variability solo and 3.5% duo. The quantified test–retest bias was 8% in solo and 5% in duo, and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was comparable in solo and duo (0.969 vs. 0.966). Conclusions Our results showed that simultaneous scans of two rats in INVEON do not affect quantification. The dual support system will allow us to reduce protocol costs and duration. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T14:54:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-28285e43d2554383a0d1a531cbf69ecf |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2191-219X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T14:54:55Z |
| publishDate | 2023-09-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | EJNMMI Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-28285e43d2554383a0d1a531cbf69ecf2023-11-26T14:12:34ZengSpringerOpenEJNMMI Research2191-219X2023-09-0113111110.1186/s13550-023-01027-93D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantificationCaroline Bouillot0Sébastien Daligault1Radu Bolbos2Nicolas Costes3Luc Zimmer4CERMEP-Imagerie du VivantCERMEP-Imagerie du VivantCERMEP-Imagerie du VivantCERMEP-Imagerie du VivantCERMEP-Imagerie du VivantAbstract Background The low throughout of small animal positron emission tomography (PET) images acquisitions represents a substantial limitation. The aims of this study were (i) to design a low-cost support for simultaneous dynamic PET scanning of two lying rats and (ii) to study its impact on brain image quantification. Results Accuracy of concentration measurement was 5.5% for one phantom in the field of view, and 5.7% for two phantoms measured simultaneously. Ratio concentration between phantoms showed an error of 6.7% ± 5.1% for Solo upper position, 6.7% ± 3.7% for Solo lower position, 5.9% ± 4.3% for Duo upper position, and 7.4% ± 6% for Duo lower position 6.7% for separated measures, and 6.6% for simultaneous measures. In vivo distribution profiles showed no difference between solo and duo uptakes. Region of Interest quantification in the whole brain showed 4.4% variability solo and 3.5% duo. The quantified test–retest bias was 8% in solo and 5% in duo, and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient was comparable in solo and duo (0.969 vs. 0.966). Conclusions Our results showed that simultaneous scans of two rats in INVEON do not affect quantification. The dual support system will allow us to reduce protocol costs and duration.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-023-01027-9Small animal imagingPET/CT18F-FDG |
| spellingShingle | Caroline Bouillot Sébastien Daligault Radu Bolbos Nicolas Costes Luc Zimmer 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification EJNMMI Research Small animal imaging PET/CT 18F-FDG |
| title | 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification |
| title_full | 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification |
| title_fullStr | 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification |
| title_full_unstemmed | 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification |
| title_short | 3D-printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat PET scanning: design and influence on quantification |
| title_sort | 3d printed dual holder system for simultaneous rat pet scanning design and influence on quantification |
| topic | Small animal imaging PET/CT 18F-FDG |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13550-023-01027-9 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT carolinebouillot 3dprinteddualholdersystemforsimultaneousratpetscanningdesignandinfluenceonquantification AT sebastiendaligault 3dprinteddualholdersystemforsimultaneousratpetscanningdesignandinfluenceonquantification AT radubolbos 3dprinteddualholdersystemforsimultaneousratpetscanningdesignandinfluenceonquantification AT nicolascostes 3dprinteddualholdersystemforsimultaneousratpetscanningdesignandinfluenceonquantification AT luczimmer 3dprinteddualholdersystemforsimultaneousratpetscanningdesignandinfluenceonquantification |