CORRECTION article

Front. Phys., 11 September 2018

Sec. Medical Physics and Imaging

Volume 6 - 2018 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2018.00103

Corrigendum: Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing

  • 1. QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria

  • 2. Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Michigan, The Detroit Medical Center, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI, United States

  • 3. MR Center of Excellence, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

In the original article, there was a mistake in Table 1 as published. The reported sensitivity unit should be kcps/MBq (instead of kcps/kBq). The corrected Table 1 appears below. The authors apologize for this error and state that this does not change the scientific conclusions of the article in any way.

Table 1

SPECT/CTPET/CTPET/SPECT/CTPET/MR
CompanySiemensGEPhilipsSiemensPhilipsGEToshibaKindsway BiotechUnited ImagingMedisoSiemensPhilipsGE
System nameIntevoDiscovery NM/CT 670BrightView XCTmCT & mCT FlowIngenuity PET/CTVereosDiscovery 690Discovery IQCelestionPoleStar m660uMI 510uMI 780AnyscanmMRIngenuity PET/MRSigna
References[18][19, 20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]VendorVendor webpage[28][29][30]
PET specificationsScintillator–––LSOLYSOLYSOLYSOBGOLYSOLYSOLYSOLYSOLYSOLSOLYSOLBS
Crystal size (mm3)––-4 × 4 × 204 × 4 × 224 × 4 × 194.2 × 6.3 × 256.3 × 6.3 × 304 × 4 × 123.63 × 3.63 × 202.35 × 2.35 × 152.76 × 2.59 × 183.9 × 3.9 × 204 × 4 × 204 × 4 × 224.2 × 5.3 × 25
Total detector elements–––32 44828 33623 04013 82411 52030 72037 632110 592101 92039 67228 67228 33620 160
Photo-detector–––PMTPMTdSiPMPMTPMTPMTPMTPMTSiPMPMTAPDPMTSiPM
ToF capability–––YesYesYesYesNoYesYesYesYesNoNoYesYes
Patient bore (cm)–––78.071.770.070.074.088.0N.A.70.070.070.060.070.760.0
Transaxial FOV (cm)–––81.567.6N.A.70.070.070.0N.A.70.070.055.059.4N.A.60.0
Axial FOV (cm)–––21.818.016.415.726.019.6N.A.23.630.023.025.818.025.0
Energy window (keV)–––435–650440–665N.A.425–650425–650425–650425–650N.A.LLD, 430N.A.430–610460–665425–650
Energy resolution (%)–––11.511.111.112.4N.A.12.4N.A.N.A.N.A.N.A.14.511.611.0
Time coincidence window (ns)–––4.14.54.04.99.51.6–3.24.1N.A.N.A.5.05.96.04.6
Time resolution (ns)–––0.50.50.30.5N.A.0.40.430.485N.A.N.A.2.90.50.4
Transaxial Resolution 1 cm/10 cm (mm)–––4.4/4.94.8/5.14.1/4.54.7/5.04.5/5.45.1/5.13.76/4.562.85/3.07Max resol. 2.94.1/4.94.3/5.04.7/5.14.2/5.2
Axial Resolution 1 cm/10 cm (mm)–––4.4/5.94.7/5.24.0/4.34.7/5.64.8/4.85.0 /5.43.64/5.293.01/2.974.2/5.14.3/6.64.6/5.05.8/7.1
Sensitivity (kcps/MBq)–––9.77.35.77.422.83.810.98.3168.115.07.021.0
Scatter Fraction (%)–––33.236.730.037.036.237.3N.A.38.440.0N.A.37.9 at peak NECR26.043.6 at peak NECR
Peak NEC (kcps @ kBq/mL)–––180 @ 28124 @ 20.3171 @ 50139 @ 29124 @ 9.170 @ 29.6224.6 @ 29.0109 @ 21.5170 @ 16.0150 @ N.A.184 @ 23.189 @ 13.7210 @ 17.5
SPECT specificationsDetector type3.8 in. NaI3.8 in. NaI3.8 in. NaI–––––––––NaI–––
Photo-detectorPMTPMTPMT–––––––––60(48) PMT–––
Detector size (cm)38.7 × 53.340.6 × 54.040.0 × 54.0–––––––––58.5(55.8) × 47.0(41.8)–––
CT specificationsMax CT slices2,6,1616Cone beam128128128641616641612816–––
CT tube max voltage (kVp)130140120140140140140140135140140140140–––
CT tube max current (mA)34544080800665665800440600667420833500–––
Max CT rotation (s)0.50.5120.30.40.40.350.50.50.390.50.30.4–––
MR specificationsPET/MR integration–––––––––––––Fully integratedSequentialFully integrated
Magnet–––––––––––––SuperconductorSuperconductorSuperconductor
Magnetic field–––––––––––––3T3T3T
Magnet length (cm)–––––––––––––163157N.A.
Magnet bore (cm)–––––––––––––606060
Maximum FOV (cm3)–––––––––––––6050 × 50 × 4550 × 50 × 50

PET, SPECT, CT, and MR specifications of selected dual and triple modality clinical systems commercially available.

N.A., data not available.

The original article has been updated.

Statements

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Summary

Keywords

hybrid imaging, combined imaging, instrumentation, nuclear medicine, data processing, data corrections

Citation

Cal-Gonzalez J, Rausch I, Shiyam Sundar LK, Lassen ML, Muzik O, Moser E, Papp L and Beyer T (2018) Corrigendum: Hybrid Imaging: Instrumentation and Data Processing. Front. Phys. 6:103. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2018.00103

Received

02 July 2018

Accepted

23 August 2018

Published

11 September 2018

Volume

6 - 2018

Edited and reviewed by

Claudia Kuntner, Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT), Austria

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Jacobo Cal-Gonzalez

This article was submitted to Biomedical Physics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physics

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics