Mutual interferences between SIAT aPET insert and a 3 T uMR 790 MRI scanner

Objective. Dual-modality small animal PET/MR imaging provides temporally correlated information on two biochemical processes of a living object. An magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-compatible small animal PET insert named Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology (SIAT) aPET was developed by using dual-ended readout depth encoding detectors to simultaneously achieve a uniform high spatial resolution and high sensitivity at the SIAT. In this work, the mutual interferences between SIAT aPET and the 3 T uMR 790 MRI scanner of United Imaging was quantitatively evaluated. Approach. To minimize the mutual interferences, only the PET detectors and the readout electronics were placed inside the MRI scanner, the major signal processing electronic was placed in the corner of the MRI room and the auxiliary unit was placed in the MRI technical room. A dedicated mouse radio fRequency (RF) coil with a transmitter and receiver was developed for the PET insert. The effects of PET scanner on the B (0) and B (1) field of the MRI scanner and the quality of the MRI images were measured. The effects of MRI imaging on the performance of both the PET detectors and scanner were also measured. Main results. The electronic and mechanical components of the PET insert affected the homogeneity of the B (0) field. The PET insert had no effect on the homogeneity of B (1) produced by the dedicated mouse coil but slightly reduced the strength of B (1). The mean and standard deviation of the RF noise map were increased by 2.2% and 11.6%, respectively, while the PET insert was placed in the MRI scanner and powered on. Eddy current was produced while the PET insert was placed in the MRI scanner, and it was further increased while the PET insert was powered on. Despite the above-mentioned interferences from the PET insert, the MR images of a uniform cylindrical water phantom showed that the changes in the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and homogeneity as the PET insert was placed in the MRI scanner were acceptable regardless of whether the PET insert was powered off or powered on. The maximum reduction of SNR was less than 11%, and the maximum reduction of homogeneity was less than 2.5% while the PET insert was placed inside the MRI scanner and powered on for five commonly used MRI sequences. MRI using gradient echo (GRE), spin echo (SE) and fast spin echo (FSE) sequences had negligible effects on the flood histograms and energy resolution of the PET detectors, as well as the spatial resolution and sensitivity of the PET scanner. Significance. The mutual interference between the SIAT aPET and the 3 T uMR 790 MRI scanner are acceptable. Simultaneous PET/MRI imaging of small animals can be performed with the two scanners.