It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Background
We propose a comprehensive evaluation of a Discovery MI 4-ring (DMI) model, using a Monte Carlo simulator (GATE) and a clinical reconstruction software package (PET toolbox). The following performance characteristics were compared with actual measurements according to NEMA NU 2-2018 guidelines: system sensitivity, count losses and scatter fraction (SF), coincidence time resolution (CTR), spatial resolution (SR), and image quality (IQ). For SR and IQ tests, reconstruction of time-of-flight (TOF) simulated data was performed using the manufacturer’s reconstruction software.
Results
Simulated prompt, random, true, scatter and noise equivalent count rates closely matched the experimental rates with maximum relative differences of 1.6%, 5.3%, 7.8%, 6.6%, and 16.5%, respectively, in a clinical range of less than 10 kBq/mL. A 3.6% maximum relative difference was found between experimental and simulated sensitivities. The simulated spatial resolution was better than the experimental one. Simulated image quality metrics were relatively close to the experimental results.
Conclusions
The current model is able to reproduce the behaviour of the DMI count rates in the clinical range and generate clinical-like images with a reasonable match in terms of contrast and noise.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 University of Burgundy, Imagerie et Vision artificielle, ImViA EA 7535, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313)
2 University of Burgundy, Institut de Chimie Moléculaire de l’Université de Bourgogne (ICMUB), UMR CNRS 6302, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313)
3 GE Healthcare, Waukesha, USA (GRID:grid.418143.b) (ISNI:0000 0001 0943 0267)
4 Institut de cancérologie Strasbourg Europe, ICANS, Strasbourg, France (GRID:grid.512000.6)
5 Georges-François Leclerc Cancer Centre, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.418037.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0641 1257)
6 University of Burgundy, Institut de Chimie Moléculaire de l’Université de Bourgogne (ICMUB), UMR CNRS 6302, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.5613.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2298 9313); Georges-François Leclerc Cancer Centre, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Dijon, France (GRID:grid.418037.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0641 1257)