Home > Riviste > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging > Fascicoli precedenti > Articles online first > The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2020 Dec 10



Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



The Quarterly Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 2020 Dec 10

DOI: 10.23736/S1824-4785.20.03293-8


lingua: Inglese

Practical setting and potential applications of interventions guided by PET/MRI

C. Martin REICH 1, Bernhard SATTLER 2 , Thies H. JOCHIMSEN 2, Michael UNGER 1, Leon MELZER 1, Lisa LANDGRAF 1, Henryk BARTHEL 2, Osama SABRI 2, Andreas MELZER 1

1 Innovation Center Computer Assisted Surgery, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; 2 Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany


INTRODUCTION: Multimodality imaging has emerged from a vision thirty years ago to routine clinical use today. Positron Emission Tomography (PET)/Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is still relatively new in this arena and particularly suitable for clinical research and technical development. PET/MRI-guidance for interventions opens up opportunities for novel treatments but at the same time demands certain technical and organizational requirements to be fulfilled. I this work, we aim to demonstrate a practical setting and potential aapplications of PET/MRI guidance of interventional procedures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The superior quantitative physiologic information of PET, the various unique imaging characteristics of MRI, and the reduced radiation exposure are the most relevant advantages of this technique. As a non-invasive interventional tool, Focused Ultrasound (FUS) ablation of tumor cells would benefit from PET/MRI for diagnostics, treatment planning and intervention. Yet, technical limitations might impeed preclinical research, given that PET/MRI sites are per se not designed as interventional suites. Nonetheless, several approaches have been offered in the past years to upgrade MRI suites for interventional purposes.
RESULTS: Taking advantage of state of the art and easy to use technology it is possible to create a supporting infrastructure that is suitable for broad preclinical adaption. Several aspects are to be addressed, including remote control of the imaging system, display of the imaging results, communication technology, and implementation of additional devices such as a FUS platform and an MR-compatible robotic system for positioning of the FUS equipment. Feasability could be demostrated with an examplary experimental setup for interventional PET/MRI.
CONCLUSIONS: Most PET/MRI sites could allow for interventions with just a few addons and modifications, such as comunication, in room image display and sytems control. By unlocking this feature, and driving preclinical research in interventional PET/MRI, translation of the protocol and methodology into clinical settings seems feasible.

KEY WORDS: Intervention; Molecular imaging; PET/MRI; FUS

inizio pagina