Advertisement

EFOMP’s protocol quality controls in PET/CT and PET/MR

Published:December 18, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.11.010

      Highlights

      • EFOMP QC PET/CT and PET/MRI protocol document.
      • QC tests to guarantee image quality, quantification accuracy and adequate radiation dose.
      • Consists of easy-to-integrate practical tests for use in clinical practice.
      • Allows users to detect changes in PET/CT/MRI system performance.
      • Crucial for avoiding the short- and long-term system and image quality deterioration.

      Abstract

      This article presents the protocol on Quality Controls in PET/CT and PET/MRI published online in May 2022 by the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics (EFOMP), which was developed by the Working group for PET/CT and PET/MRI Quality Control (QC) protocol.
      The main objective of this protocol was to comprehensively provide simple and practical procedures that may be integrated into clinical practice to identify changes in the PET/CT/MRI system's performance and avoid short- and long-term quality deterioration.
      The protocol describes the quality control procedures on radionuclide calibrators, weighing scales, PET, CT and MRI systems using selected and measurable parameters that are directly linked to clinical images quality. It helps to detect problems before they can impact clinical studies in terms of safety, image quality, quantification accuracy and patient radiation dose.
      CT and MRI QCs are described only in the context of their use for PET (attenuation correction and anatomical localization) imaging.
      Detailed step-by-step instructions have been provided, limiting any misinterpretations or interpersonal variations as much as possible.
      This paper presents the main characteristics of the protocol illustrated together with a brief summary of the content of each chapter.
      A regular QC based on the proposed protocol would guarantee that PET/CT and PET/MRI systems operate under optimal conditions, resulting in the best performance for routine clinical tasks.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Vandenberghe S.
        • Moskal P.
        • Karp J.S.
        State of the art in total body PET.
        EJNMMI Phys. 2020; 7: 1-33
      1. El Fakhri G, Fulton R, Gray JE, Marengo M, Zimmerman RE. IAEA Human Health Series No. 1: Quality Assurance for PET and PET/CT Systems 2009.

      2. Beyer T, Holm S, Mawlawi OR, Robilotta C. IAEA Human Health Series No. 27: PET/CT Atlas on Quality Control and Image Artefacts 2014.

      3. Mawlawi OR, Kemp BJ, Jordan DW, Campbell JM, Halama JR, Massoth RJ, et al. AAPM n°126 : PET / CT Acceptance Testing and Quality Assurance. 2019.

        • Pike L.
        Quality Assurance of PET and PET/CT Systems.
        Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine, 2013 (Report 108.)
        • Busemann Sokole E.
        • Płachcínska A.
        • Britten A.
        • Lyra Georgosopoulou M.
        • Tindale W.
        • Klett R.
        Routine quality control recommendations for nuclear medicine instrumentation.
        Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 37: 662-671https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-009-1347-y
        • National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA)
        Performance measurements of positron emission tomographs NEMA NU-2018.
        NEMA Stand Publ NU, 2–2018 2018.
        • International Electrotechnical Commission
        Evaluation and Routine Testing in Medical Imaging Departments: Part 2–6: Constancy Tests: X-ray Equipment for Computed Tomography.
        IEC, 1993
        • Reynés-Llompart G.
        • Zorz A.
        • Boellaard R.
        • Ptáček J.
        • Pike L.
        • Soret M.
        • et al.
        Quality control in PET/CT and PET/MRI: Results of a survey amongst European countries.
        EJMP. 2022; 99: 16-21https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2022.05.004
      4. EFOMP Protocol Quality controls in PET/CT and PET/MRI https://www.efomp.org/index.php?r=fc&id=protocols, accessed on September 1, 2022.

        • International Electrotechnical Commission
        Radionuclide imaging devices – characteristics and test conditions – Part 1: Positron emission tomographs.
        IEC, 2013
        • Information S.
        • for Ingenuity TF PET, CT,
        Release 4, Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland).
        Inc, Rev BOctober 2016
      5. Vereos PET/CT System, Technical reference guide, Philips Medical Systems (Cleveland), 459800505051_E, 07/2017.

      6. Discovery™ MI and Discovery™ MI Columbia Learning and Reference Guide, Operating Documentation 5720964-1EN Revision 4 © 2017 General Electric Company.

      7. SIGNA™ PET/MR with QuantWorks™ Operator Manual, 26.0 Operator Manual, English 5770625-1EN (2019/05) Rev.3, © 2019 General Electric Company.

      8. Vereos PET/CT calibration instructions, 459800485171 Revision G, 2020 Koninklijke Philips N.V. All Rights Reserved. CSIP 0.

      9. Biograph Vision Operator Manual - PET syngo VG8xx, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, print no. MI-VIS-OM.621.12.02.02, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, 2020.

      10. Biograph mMR Operator Manual – PET syngo MR E11, Siemens Healthcare GmbH, 2016.

      11. EUROSPIN II, Magnetic resonance quality assessment test objects. Instructions for use. Diagnostic Sonar LTD. 1996.

      12. American College of Radiology, Committee on Quality Assurance in Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 2015, Magnetic Resonance Imaging QUALITY CONTROL MANUAL.

        • International Electrotechnical Commission
        Nuclear medicine instrumentation - Routine tests - Part 4: Radionuclide calibrators.
        IEC, 2019
        • Gadd R.
        • Baker M.
        • Nijran K.S.
        • Owens S.
        • Thomson W.
        • Woods M.J.
        • et al.
        Measurement good practice guide no. 93: protocol for establishing and maintaining the calibration of medical radionuclide calibrators and their quality control.
        Teddingt Natl Phys Lab. 2006;
        • Carey J.E.
        • Byrne P.
        • DeWerd L.
        • Lieto R.
        • Petry N.
        The selection, use, calibration, and quality assurance of radionuclide calibrators used in nuclear medicine.
        Maryland, United States AAPM Rep2012
        • Janmahasatian S.
        • Duffull S.B.
        • Ash S.
        • Ward L.C.
        • Byrne N.M.
        • Green B.
        Quantification of lean bodyweight.
        Clin Pharmacokinet. 2005; 44: 1051-1065
        • Verbraecken J.
        • Van de Heyning P.
        • De Backer W.
        • Van Gaal L.
        Body surface area in normal weight, overweight, and obese adults a comparison study.
        Metabolism. 2006; 55: 515-524https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2005.11.004
        • Spencer B.A.
        • Berg E.
        • Schmall J.P.
        • Omidvari N.
        • Leung E.K.
        • Abdelhafez Y.G.
        • et al.
        Performance evaluation of the uEXPLORER total-body PET/CT scanner based on NEMA NU 2–2018 with additional tests to characterize PET scanners with a long axial field of view.
        J Nucl Med. 2021; 62: 861-870
        • Prenosil G.A.
        • Sari H.
        • Fürstner M.
        • Afshar-Oromieh A.
        • Shi K.
        • Rominger A.
        • et al.
        Performance Characteristics of the Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT System with a Long Axial Field of View Using the NEMA NU 2–2018 Standard.
        J Nucl Med. 2022; 63: 476-484
        • Kinahan P.
        • Wahl R.
        • Shao L.
        • Frank R.
        • Perlman E.
        The QIBA profile for quantitative FDG-PET/CT oncology imaging.
        J Nucl Med. 2014; 55: 1520
      13. International Electrotechnical Commission. Evaluation and routine testing in medical imaging departments--part 3--5: acceptance and constancy tests--imaging performance of computed tomography x-ray equipment 2019.

        • Iaea
        Quality Assurance Programme for Computed Tomography: Diagnostic and Therapy Applications.
        IAEA Hum Heal Ser, 2012: 13-17
      14. Samei E, Bakalyar D, L Boedeker K, Brady S, Fan J, Leng S, et al. Report of AAPM Task Group 233: Performance Evaluation of Computed Tomography Systems. 2019.

      15. Beyer2016, Beyer T, Lassen M, Boellaard R, Delso G, Yaqub M, Sattler B, Quick HH, Investigating the state-of-the-art in whole-body MR-based attenuation correction: an intra-individual, inter-system, inventory study on three clinical PET/MR systems, MAGMA 2016 Feb; 29(1): 75-87.

        • Boellaard R.
        • Rausch I.
        • Beyer T.
        • Delso G.
        • Yaqub M.
        • Quick H.H.
        • et al.
        Quality control for quantitative multicenter whole-body PET/MR studies: a NEMA image quality phantom study with three current PET/MR systems.
        Med Phys. 2015; 42: 5961-5969
        • Ziegler S.
        • Jakoby B.W.
        • Braun H.
        • Paulus D.H.
        • Quick H.H.
        NEMA image quality phantom measurements and attenuation correction in integrated PET/MR hybrid imaging.
        EJNMMI Phys. 2015; 2: 1-14
      16. Lennie E, Charalampos T, Steven S. Multimodal phantoms for clinical PET/MRI. EJNMMI Phys 2021;8:62 10.1186/s40658-021-00408-0.

        • McGarry C.K.
        • Grattan L.J.
        • Ivory A.M.
        • Leek F.
        • Liney G.P.
        • Liu Y.
        • et al.
        Tissue mimicking materials for imaging and therapy phantoms: a review.
        Phys Med Biol. 2020; 65: 23TR01
        • Keller S.H.
        • Jakoby B.
        • Svalling S.
        • Kjaer A.
        • Højgaard L.
        • Klausen T.L.
        Cross-calibration of the Siemens mMR: easily acquired accurate PET phantom measurements, long-term stability and reproducibility.
        EJNMMI Phys. 2016; 3: 1-8
        • Alongi P.
        • Laudicella R.
        • Desideri I.
        • Chiaravalloti A.
        • Borghetti P.
        • Quartuccio N.
        • et al.
        Positron emission tomography with computed tomography imaging (PET/CT) for the radiotherapy planning definition of the biological target volume: PART 1.
        Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2019 Aug; 140: 74-79https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.01.011
        • Fiorentino A.
        • Laudicella R.
        • Ciurlia E.
        • Annunziata S.
        • Lancellotta V.
        • Mapelli P.
        • et al.
        Positron emission tomography with computed tomography imaging (PET/CT) for the radiotherapy planning definition of the biological target volume: PART 2.
        Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2019 Jul; 139: 117-124https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2019.03.008
      17. Mutic S, Palta JR, Butker EK, Das IJ, Huq MS, Loo LND, et al. Quality assurance for computed-tomography simulators and the computed-tomography-simulation process: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 66. Med Phys 2003;30:2762–92. 10.1118/1.1609271.