Table 2.

Comparison of the spatial resolution of different preclinical PET scanners. Data are taken from [5–15]

System	Recon. method	Crystal size (${\text{mm}}^3$)	FWHM (mm)a
			R	T	A
SAFIR	FBP3DRP	$2.1\times 2.1\times 13.0$	2.77	1.89	2.83
SAFIR	MLEM	$2.1\times 2.1\times 13.0$	1.08	1.19	1.23
Hyperion IID	FBPb	$0.93\times 0.93\times 12$	1.7	1.8	1.4
NanoScan	SSRB FBP	$1.1\times 1.1\times 13.0$	1.50	1.32	0.91
MuPET	SSRB FBP	$1.24\times 1.4\times 9.5$	1.48	1.34	0.99
Inveon	FOREc + 2D FBP	$1.5\times 1.5\times 10.0$	1.6	1.6	2.3
IRIS	MLEM	$1.6\times 1.6\times 12.0$	1.05	1.05	1.25
ClearPET	3D FBP	$2.0\times 2.0\times 10.0$	1.94	2.00	3.24
Mosaic HP	FBP3DRP	$2.0\times 2.0\times 10.0$	2.32	2.32	2.64
LabPET 8TM	SSRB FBP	$2.0\times 2.0\times 14.0$	1.65	1.70	1.40
LabPET 8TM	2D MLEM	$2.0\times 2.0\times 14.0$	1.0	1.0	1.7
microPET R4	FOREbFBP	$2.1\times 2.1\times 10.0$	2.13	2.21	2.72
Xtrim-PET	SSRB FBP	$2.1\times 2.1\times 10.0$	2.01	1.95	1.74
Bruker	MLEM	$50.0\times 50.0\times 10.0^d$	0.87	0.78	0.77

^aFWHM at 5 mm radial offset in radial (R), tangential (T) and axial (A) directions.

^bHyperion II^D reports a spatial resolution of 0.9 mm FWHM in three directions, calculated using a Gaussian fit, at the center of the scanner for the MLEM reconstruction [36].

^cFourier rebinning algorithm [37].

^dMonolithic crystals.