Skip to main content

Assessing effects of low-dose CT attenuation correction on quantification and image quality on a LAFOV PET system with a modified NEMA-IQ phantom

In brief

Most low-dose CT protocols cut dose 80% with PET values within 2%

In a phantom study, many low-dose CT settings reduced CT radiation by at least 80% while keeping average PET uptake values within 2% of those from a typical CT protocol. But streak artifacts and photon starvation sometimes increased PET quantification errors by 10% to 20%, so these results need validation in patients and careful protocol selection.

Journal
Medical physics (Q1)
Published
1 November 2026
Study design
Unclassified
Evidence level
Level 5, Expert Opinion (CEBM 5)
Authors
Vanessa Nadig, Jane Mackewn, Georgios Krokos, Lewis C Davies, Daniel Darian, Sarah-May Gould, et al.
PMID
42968509
DOI
10.1002/mp.70706

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Medical Physics (top studies of the week, 8 November 2026): Phantom study quantifies low-dose CT effects on PET accuracy

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the past decades, efforts have been directed toward increasing the sensitivity of PET systems to enable low-dose PET imaging and shorter scan times. The Biograph Vision Quadra PET/CT scanner (Siemens Healthineers, Knoxville, TN, USA) combines an increased solid angle coverage with time of flight, enabling a significant reduction in administered activity. To fully benefit from low-dose PET imaging, the dose of the CT scan should ideally also be reduced. PURPOSE: The CT radiation dose can be reduced by lowering the tube voltage and exposure as well as by the use of tin filtration. Reducing the CT dose must be carefully aligned with any impact that changing CT image quality and quantitative metrics may have on the PET quantification, for example via linear attenuation coefficients. We evaluate the impact of low-dose CT protocols on the PET quantification in soft-tissue-like and bone-equivalent materials using a customized phantom. METHODS: The phantom was assembled out of a NEMA-IQ phantom, several layers of saline and two bovine long bones, to simulate a patient positioned with arms down. A 10-min PET scan with 47 different accompanying CT scans was acquired. The CT tube voltage and exposure were varied between 70 k V to 140 k V , with and without tin filtration, and 7 mAs to 400 mAs , respectively. The effect of the different CT parameters on the PET image quality and quantitative accuracy was assessed via several quantitative metrics, including standardized uptake value (SUV) and signal-to-noise ratio, along with the CT dose length product (DLP). RESULTS: The recorded DLP values suggest that using all tube voltages except 140 k V combined with exposures in the range of 7 m A s to 30 m A s , can result in dose savings of ≥ 80 % compared to a typical clinical protocol ( 120 k V , 50 mAs ). Compared to this typical protocol, HU differed more in bone ( 10 % to 40 % difference) than in soft tissue ( 1 % to 30 % difference), and more streak artefacts and photon starvation were seen when configuring low tube voltages and exposures, with an accompanying increase in CT noise. The observed artefacts were transferred with low intensity to the PET images via the attenuation map. The SUV mean remained within 2 % of the SUV mean of the typical clinical protocol for most tested protocols. The presence of artefacts in the CT images had a bigger impact on PET quantification in both soft tissue and bone ( SUV mean difference of 10 % to 20 % ) than any difference in HU. Protocols that resulted in artefacts showed an increased inaccuracy in attenuation correction and scatter estimation, as assessed via the "lung" residual error (up to 10 % to 20 % increase). CONCLUSIONS: Even for low-dose CT protocols, PET quantification remained consistent in all NEMA-IQ spheres for many materials. Beam hardening and photon starvation in the CT image are likely to occur in specific body regions such as hips, shoulders or the abdomen for an arms-down scan and these effects had a bigger impact on the quantification than any difference in HU in both soft tissue and bone. This therefore should be considered when selecting suitable CT imaging parameters.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.