Demonstrates positronium imaging in human tissues using Mn and Co isotopes, suggesting new imaging techniques.
This study demonstrates the applicability of ⁵²Mn and ⁵⁵Co radionuclides for positronium imaging. Positronium Lifetime Imaging (PLI) extends positron emission tomography by using the lifetime of positronium atoms as a probe of tissue molecular architecture. However, its practical use requires β ⁺ emitters that also provide an additional prompt γ ray to mark the positron creation time. In this work, we report the first PLI measurements performed with ⁵²Mn and ⁵⁵Co using the modular J-PET. Four samples were studied in each experiment: two Certified Reference Materials (polycarbonate and fused silica) and two human tissues (cardiac myxoma and adipose). The selection of PLI events was based on the registration of two 511 keV annihilation photons and one prompt gamma in triple coincidence. From the resulting lifetime spectra we extracted the mean ortho-positronium lifetime τ oPs and the mean positron lifetime Δ Tₘₑₐₙ for each sample. The measured values of τ oPs in polycarbonate using both isotopes matches well with the certified reference values. Furthermore, ⁵⁵Co reproduced identical results for fused-silica measurements at their respective uncertainty levels. In contrast, measurements with ⁵²Mn in fused silica show a minor deviation, which could be caused by the Parafilm spacer. In myxoma and adipose tissue, the reduced τ oPs values are mainly linked to the long storage history of the samples rather than to the choice of isotope. Comparing peak-to-background ratios and spectral purity, ⁵⁵Co provides cleaner PLI data under the same experimental conditions. Although ⁵²Mn offers a longer half-life and a multi gamma cascade enhancing β ⁺ + γ coincidences, but at the expense of higher background. In this study, we demonstrate that the applied selection criteria on the data measured with the modular J-PET can be used for PLI studies even with radionuclides with complex decay patterns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Das et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: