Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

Gene Regulation and Targeted Therapy in Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis: Radiological Findings from Dual Energy CT and PET/CT
Published on: January 22, 2018
Computed tomography automatic exposure control techniques in 18F-FDG oncology PET-CT scanning
1aDepartment of Medical Physics and Engineering, Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Leeds bCentral Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK.
Different computed tomography (CT) automatic exposure control (AEC) systems significantly alter radiation dose and image quality based on patient weight. Understanding these variations is crucial for optimizing imaging protocols in PET-CT oncology.
Area of Science:
- Medical Imaging
- Radiology
- Nuclear Medicine
Background:
- Computed tomography (CT) automatic exposure control (AEC) systems are integral to modern PET-CT scanners.
- Comparing AEC techniques across manufacturers is essential for consistent imaging.
- Fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET-CT is a key tool in oncology imaging.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the automatic exposure control (AEC) techniques of three major PET-CT manufacturers.
- To evaluate AEC performance for fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) half-body oncology imaging.
- To assess the impact of AEC on radiation dose and image quality across varying patient weights.
Main Methods:
- A retrospective audit of 70 patients undergoing half-body CT scans on GE, Philips, and Siemens PET-CT systems.
- Recording of patient demographics and radiation dose information.
- Calculation of image noise using the standard deviation of Hounsfield units in the liver.
- Phantom studies using a Rando phantom to directly compare AEC systems across various settings.
Main Results:
- Significant differences in dose and image quality variation with patient weight were observed among the three manufacturers.
- The GE system exhibited the largest dose variation with weight, while Philips showed the least.
- Image noise varied with patient weight in Philips and Siemens systems but remained constant in the GE system.
- Tube current modulation techniques and AEC settings directly influenced these observed differences.
Conclusions:
- CT AEC systems from GE, Philips, and Siemens demonstrate distinct tube current modulation patterns.
- These differences result in varied radiation doses and image quality levels depending on patient weight.
- Awareness of system-specific AEC behavior is vital for optimizing PET-CT imaging protocols in oncology.
More Related Videos
06:53Management of Respiratory Motion Artefacts in 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography using an Amplitude-Based Optimal Respiratory Gating Algorithm
Published on: July 23, 2020
09:55Radiosynthesis, Quality Control, and Small Animal Positron Emission Tomography Imaging of 68Ga-Labelled Nano Molecules
Published on: October 4, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Positron Emission Tomography
One of the main requirements of a PET scan is a positron-emitting radioisotope, which is produced in a cyclotron and then attached to a substance used by the part of the body...
Computed Tomography
The technique was invented in the 1970s and is based on the principle that as X-rays pass through the body, they are absorbed or reflected at different levels. In the technique, a patient lies on a motorized platform while a computerized axial tomography (CAT) scanner rotates...
Imaging Studies II: Positron Emission Tomography and Scintigraphy
Fundamental Principles of PET