AbstractBackground

Conventional short‐axis PET typically utilizes multi‐bed multi‐pass acquisition to produce quantitative whole‐body dynamic images and cannot record all the uptake information simultaneously, resulting in errors when fitting the time‐activity curves (TACs) and calculating radiation doses.

Purpose

The aim of this study is to evaluate the ¹³N‐ammonia biodistribution and the internal radiation doses using a 194 cm long total‐body PET/CT scanner (uEXPLORER), and make a comparison with the previous short‐axis PET results.

Methods

Ten subjects (age 40–74 years) received ¹³N‐NH₃ injection (418.1‐670.81 MBq) and were under a dynamic scan for about 60 min with using a 3‐dimensional whole‐body protocol. ROIs were drawn visually on 11 major organs (brain, thyroid, gallbladder, heart wall, kidneys, liver, pancreas, spleen, lungs, bone marrow, and urinary bladder content) for each subject. TACs were generated using Pmod and the absorbed radiation doses were calculated using Olinda 2.2. To compare with the conventional PET/CT, five points were sampled on uEXPLORER's TACs to mimic the result of a short‐axis PET/CT (15 cm axial FOV, consisted of 9 or 10 bed positions). Then the TACs were obtained using the multi‐exponential fitting method, and the residence time and radiation dose were also calculated and compared with uEXPLORER.

Results

The highest absorbed organ doses were the pancreas, thyroid, spleen, heart wall, and kidneys for the male. For the female, the first five highest absorbed organ dose coefficients were the pancreas, heart wall, spleen, lungs, and kidneys. The lowest absorbed dose was found in red marrow both for male and female. The simulated short‐axis PET can fit TACs well for the gradually‐changed uptake organs but typically underestimated for the rapid‐uptake organs during the first‐10 min, resulting in errors in the calculated radiation dose.

Conclusion

uEXPLORER PET/CT can measure ¹³N‐ammonia's TACs simultaneously in all organs of the whole body, which can provide more accurate biodistribution and radiation dose estimation compared with the conventional short‐axis scanners.