Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Data acquisition in PET imaging.

Frederic H Fahey1

  • 1PET Center, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA. ffahey@wfubmc.edu

Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology
|June 11, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Pediatric Reference Ranges for Glomerular Filtration Rate Determined by a Single Injection of <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DTPA.

Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine·2026
Same author

Summary of the 2024 Update of the North American Guidelines for Pediatric Administered Radiopharmaceutical Activities.

Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine·2025
Same author

2024 Update of the North American Consensus Guidelines for Pediatric Administered Radiopharmaceutical Activities.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2025
Same author

Weight-based determination of administered activity in <sup>99m</sup>Tc-DMSA renal SPECT in infants: are minimum administered activities necessary?

Pediatric radiology·2025
Same author

Review of the Clinical and Technical Aspects of <sup>99m</sup>Tc-Dimercaptosuccinic Acid Renal Imaging: The Comeback "Kit".

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2024
Same author

Girth-based administered activity for pediatric <sup>99m</sup> Tc-DMSA SPECT.

Medical physics·2023
Same journal

<sup>18</sup>F-NaF PET/CT Versus <sup>18</sup>F-FDG PET/CT for Baseline Mapping in Ollier Disease: A Pediatric Case.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
Same journal

Incidental Detection of Aggressive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer on <sup>99m</sup>Tc-Sestamibi Parathyroid Scintigraphy.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
Same journal

Structured Educational Tours in Hospital-Based Radiopharmaceutical Production: Balancing Safety and Learning.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
Same journal

Development of a Phantom for Evaluating Image Quality and Partial-Volume Effects in Hot and Cold Regions in Small-Animal SPECT and PET.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
Same journal

Nonuniformity in a Certified <sup>68</sup>Ge PET Cylinder Phantom: Implications for Normalization Quality Assurance.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
Same journal

Reducing Formation of Suspected Tracer Microemboli During Preparation of <sup>99m</sup>Tc-Tagged Heat-Damaged Red Blood Cells.

Journal of nuclear medicine technology·2026
See all related articles

This paper clarifies Positron Emission Tomography (PET) data acquisition, detailing sinograms and projection views for raw data storage. It explains 2D and 3D PET differences and axial sampling concepts like span and maximum ring difference.

Area of Science:

  • Nuclear Medicine
  • Medical Imaging Physics

Background:

  • Positron Emission Tomography (PET) data acquisition differs significantly from planar nuclear medicine and Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT).
  • Understanding PET-specific terminology and data organization is crucial for effective imaging.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To provide readers with essential terminology and a comprehensive understanding of PET data acquisition.
  • To elucidate the considerations and choices involved in different PET data acquisition strategies.
  • To compare PET data acquisition methods with those used in SPECT.

Main Methods:

  • Discussion of sinograms and projection views as methods for storing and visualizing raw PET data.
  • Exploration of techniques to enhance axial sampling while ensuring adequate counts per slice.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Description of sinogram compression (mashing) to manage raw data storage requirements.

    • Main Results:

    • Detailed comparison of 2-dimensional (2D) and 3-dimensional (3D) PET data acquisition and storage.
    • Introduction of "Michelograms" for visualizing axial sampling characteristics in both 2D and 3D PET.
    • Explanation of key terms such as "span" and "maximum ring difference" and their impact on axial sampling.

    Conclusions:

    • Readers will be able to describe and compare PET data storage methods (sinograms, projection views) with SPECT.
    • Readers will understand the relationship between "span," "maximum ring difference," and axial sampling in 2D and 3D PET.
    • Readers will be able to identify three key differences between 3D and 2D PET acquisition.