PET systems

Scanner type	Studied FOM	Agreement	References
ECAT EXACT HR+, CPS	Spatial resolution Sensitivity Count rates Scatter fraction	about 3 % good at activity concentrations about 3 %	Jan et al. 2005
ECAT HRRT, Siemens	Spatial resolution Scatter fraction Scattered coinc profiles Count rates	excellent ( very good (visual) good (about 10%)	Bataille et al. 2004
Hi-Rez, Siemens	Scatter fraction Count rates NEC curves	about 1 % good at activity concentrations good at activity concentrations	Michel et al. 2006
Allegro, Philips	Count rate Scatter fraction	8 %	Lamare et al. 2006
GE Advance, GEMS	Energy spectra Scatter fraction	not reported	Schmidtlein et al. 2006
MicroPET P4, Concorde	Spatial resolution Sensitivity Miniature Derenzo phantom	about 7 % visual assessment	Jan et al. 2003
MicroPET Focus 220, Siemens	Spatial resolution Sensitivity Count rates for mouse phantom	about 5 % about 3 % prompt coinc: delayed coinc:	Jan et al. 2005
Mosaic, Philips	Scatter fraction Count rates	about 5 % 4-15 %	Merheb et al. 2006
Inveon PET/SPECT/CT, Siemens	PET scatter fraction PET count rates PET sensitivity SPECT scatter fraction SPECT energy resolution SPECT sensitivity CT dose rate	1.7-8.3 % about 7 % about 2.5 % about 3 % about 2.3 % matched as closely as possible to 0.02 mGy/s	Lee et al. 2013

Scanner type