A

Low-Count 89 Zr Imaging Using a Long LSO-Based PET Scanner: A Simulation Study

Abstract

The high sensitivity of long axial field-of-view PET scanners enables effective low-count89Zr imaging. However, intrinsic background from lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) crystals introduces random coincidences. This study evaluated image quality and the impact of LSO background in low-count89Zr PET using GATE Monte Carlo simulations of a NEMA IEC phantom and a patient-based phantom with varying lesion sizes and target-to-background ratios (TBRs). Images were reconstructed with vendor-specific software, both with and without LSO background. Simulated data were compared to experiments based on true and random coincidence statistics. The patient phantom was assessed using standardized uptake values (SUVmax, SUVmean). Activityreduced simulations with dose reduction factors (DRFs) from 2 to 40 showed increasing random fractions at lower activity levels, effectively identified by delayed window method. At high DRFs (20–40), a small negative bias (approx. 5%) in SUV values due to LSO was observed. The simulation framework tends to overestimate random fractions compared to experimental data, indicating the need for further optimization under ultra-low activity conditions. In general, the results suggest that low-count89Zr imaging is technically feasible up to DRF 40, although it involves trade-offs in noise, acquisition time, and detection of small and low-TBR lesions.

Authors 12

  1. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  2. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  3. Affiliation as printed

    Siemens Medical Solutions USA Inc.,Knoxville,Tennessee,United States of America

  4. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  5. University of Leeds

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Leeds,Department of Applied Mathematics,Leeds,United Kingdom

  6. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  7. Centre de Recherche en Acquisition et Traitement de l'Image pour la Santé

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Lyon, CREATIS,Lyon,France

  8. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  9. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  10. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

  11. FH Aachen

    Affiliation as printed

    FH Aachen University of Applied Sciences,Faculty of Biomedical Engineering and Technomathematics,Jülich,Germany

  12. University Medical Center Groningen · University of Groningen

    Affiliation as printed

    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen,Department of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging,Groningen,Netherlands

Cited by 0 stored of 0

No patents citing this paper on Lens.org (checked 2026-10-06).

References 0