Search

Purpose: The trend towards faster acquisition protocols in whole-body positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) arises the question of whether short PET data acquisition protocols in a whole-body multi-station context allow for reduced PET acquisition times while providing adequate PET image quality and accurate quantification parameters. The study goal is to investigate how reducing PET acquisition times affects PET image quality and quantification in whole-body PET/MR in patients with oncologic findings., Methods: Fifty-one patients with different oncologic findings underwent a clinical whole-body 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MR examination. PET data was reconstructed with 4, 3, 2, and 1 min/bed time intervals for each patient to simulate the effect of reduced PET acquisition times. The 4-minute PET reconstructions served as reference standard. All whole-body PET data sets were analyzed regarding image quality, lesion detectability, PET quantification and standardized uptake values., Results: A total of 91 lesions were detected in the 4-minute PET reconstructions. The same number of congruent lesions was also noticed in the 3 and 2 minutes-per-bed (mpb) reconstructed images. A total of 2 lesions in 2 patients was not detected in the 1 minute PET data reconstructions due to poor image quality. Image noise in the blood pool increased from 22.2% (4 mpb) to 42.1% (1 mpb). Signal-to-noise ratio declined with shorter timeframes from 13.1 (4 mpb) to 9.3 (1 mpb). SUVmean and SUVmax showed no significant changes between 4 and 1 mpb reconstructed timeframes., Conclusions: Reconstruction of PET data with different time intervals has shown that 2 minutes acquisition time per bed position instead of 4 minutes is sufficient to provide accurate lesion detection and adequate image quality in a clinical setting, despite the trends to lower image quality with shorter PET acquisition times. This provides latitude for potential reduction of PET acquisition times in fast PET/MR whole-body examinations., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.