Skip to main content

Table 3 Attenuation correction techniques

From: PET/MRI: a frontier in era of complementary hybrid imaging

Technique Merits Demerits References
Dixon (MRI) Distinguishes fat from water
Localises uptake volume of PET
Extracts the lung with segmentation
Limited usage for attenuation correction
Needs different echo times
Cannot be used for detection of bone
(Martinez-Möller et al. 2009; Hu et al. 2009; Schulz et al. 2011)
UTE (MRI) Aids in detection of bone region Consumes extra time for MRI data acquisition
Not applicable for whole body imaging
(Schulz et al. 2011; Keereman et al. 2010; Catana et al. 2010)
Atlas &Template (MRI) Faster process
Minimal or no dosage is required
Causes anatomical abnormalities
Not applicable for whole body imaging
Certain FOV gets truncated
Requires templates for coils
(Hofmann et al. 2008; Kops and Herzog 2013; Malone et al. 2011; Klein et al. 2010)
Emission (PET) Minimal or zero additional acquisition time.
Uses TOF information also.
Less response to radionuclides such as FDG
Requires templates for coils
(Nuyts et al. 1999; Defrise et al. 2012; Rezaei et al. 2012; Boellaard et al. 2014)
Transmission (PET) Primarily used for analysis of field of view Needs additional dose of radionuclides
The attenuation map is corrupted with noise
The spatial resolution is minimal
(Berker et al. 2014; Mollet et al. 2012; Mollet et al. 2012; Mollet et al. 2014; Watson et al. 2013)