An integrated MR/PET system: prospective applications.
Radiology is strongly depending on medical imaging technology and consequently directing technological progress. A novel technology can only be established, however, if improved diagnostic accuracy influence on therapeutic management and/or overall reduced cost can be evidenced. It has been demonstrated recently that Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) can technologically be integrated into one single hybrid system. Some scientific arguments on the benefits are obvious, e.g., that simultaneous imaging of morphological and functional information will improve tissue characterization. However, crossfire of questions still remains: what unmet radiological needs are addressed by the novel system? What level of hardware integration is reasonable, or would software-based image co-registration be sufficient? Will MR/PET achieve higher diagnostic accuracy compared to separate imaging? What is the added value compared to other hybrid imaging modalities like PET/CT? And finally, is the system economically reasonable and has the potential to reduce overall costs for therapy planning and monitoring? This article tries to highlight some perspectives of applying an integrated MR/PET system for simultaneous morphologic and functional imaging.
Schlemmer
Heinz-Peter
HP
Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Strasse 3, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany. heinz-peter.schlemmer@med.uni-tuebingen.de
Pichler
Bernd J
BJ
Krieg
Robert
R
Heiss
Wolf-Dieter
WD
D035843:Biomedical Research; D001927:Brain Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000295:instrumentation*; D013673:Technology Assessment, Biomedical; D014055:Tomography, Emission-Computed / Q000295:instrumentation*; D014057:Tomography, X-Ray Computed / Q000295:instrumentation; D051598:Whole Body Imaging
Invest Radiol. 2005 Feb;40(2):64-71
15654249
Eur J Cancer. 2006 Feb;42(3):342-50
16364631
J Nucl Med. 2008 Apr;49(4):511-4
18375921
J Magn Reson. 2007 Jun;186(2):305-10
17433742
Cancer Res. 2007 Feb 15;67(4):1706-15
17308112
Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2007 Jun;18(3):193-202
17762383
Brain Lang. 2006 Jul;98(1):57-65
16519926
Eur J Radiol. 2005 Jul;55(1):41-55
15950100
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Mar 11;105(10):3705-10
18319342
Ann Nucl Med. 2003 Apr;17(2):79-89
12790355
J Chem Neuroanat. 2003 Dec;26(4):293-9
14729131
Nat Med. 2008 Apr;14(4):459-65
18376410
NeuroRx. 2005 Apr;2(2):333-47
15897954
J Nucl Med. 2007 Sep;48(9):1468-81
17704239
Eur J Cancer. 2007 Feb;43(3):557-64
17224266
Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Nov 15;13(22 Pt 1):6610-6
18006761
Radiology. 2008 Sep;248(3):1028-35
18710991
Eur J Neurol. 2007 Jun;14(6):690-3
17539952
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2002 Feb 19;99(4):2344-9
11782534
J Clin Oncol. 2004 Nov 1;22(21):4357-68
15514377
Lancet Neurol. 2005 Jan;4(1):42-53
15620856
J Nucl Med. 2008 Nov;49(11):1875-83
18927326
J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008 May;27(5):941-54
18302231
J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2000 Sep;20(9):1276-93
10994849
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008 Jun;35(6):1142-6
18283452
J Nucl Med. 2001 Mar;42(3):533-4
11337536