Practical Considerations for Clinical PET/MR Imaging

Samuel Galgano; Zachary Viets; Kathryn Fowler; Lael Gore; John V Thomas; Michelle McNamara; Jonathan McConathy

doi:10.1016/j.cpet.2017.09.002

Practical Considerations for Clinical PET/MR Imaging

PET Clin. 2018 Jan;13(1):97-112. doi: 10.1016/j.cpet.2017.09.002.

Authors

Samuel Galgano¹, Zachary Viets², Kathryn Fowler², Lael Gore¹, John V Thomas¹, Michelle McNamara¹, Jonathan McConathy³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), 619 19th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35249, USA.
² Department of Radiology, Washington University in St Louis, 510 South Kingshighway Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
³ Department of Radiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB), 619 19th Street South, Birmingham, AL 35249, USA. Electronic address: jmcconathy@uabmc.edu.

PMID: 29157390
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpet.2017.09.002

Abstract

Clinical PET/MR imaging is currently performed at a number of centers around the world as part of routine standard of care. This article focuses on issues and considerations for a clinical PET/MR imaging program, focusing on routine standard-of-care studies. Although local factors influence how clinical PET/MR imaging is implemented, the approaches and considerations described here intend to apply to most clinical programs. PET/MR imaging provides many more options than PET/computed tomography with diagnostic advantages for certain clinical applications but with added complexity. A recurring theme is matching the PET/MR imaging protocol to the clinical application to balance diagnostic accuracy with efficiency.

Keywords: FDG-PET; Oncologic imaging; PET/MR imaging; PET/MR imaging protocols; Whole-body PET/MR imaging.

Publication types

Review

MeSH terms

Humans
Magnetic Resonance Imaging / methods*
Multimodal Imaging / methods*
Neoplasms / diagnostic imaging*
Positron-Emission Tomography / methods*
Reproducibility of Results
Whole Body Imaging / methods