Display options
Cite
Gu Z, Bao Q, Taschereau R, et al. Optimization of the Energy Window for PETbox4, a Preclinical PET Tomograph With a Small Inner Diameter. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2014;61(3):1164-1173doi: 10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326.
Gu, Z., Bao, Q., Taschereau, R., Wang, H., Bai, B., & Chatziioannou, A. F. (2014). Optimization of the Energy Window for PETbox4, a Preclinical PET Tomograph With a Small Inner Diameter. IEEE transactions on nuclear science, 61(3), 1164-1173. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326
Gu, Z, et al. "Optimization of the Energy Window for PETbox4, a Preclinical PET Tomograph With a Small Inner Diameter." IEEE transactions on nuclear science vol. 61,3 (2014): 1164-1173. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326
Gu Z, Bao Q, Taschereau R, Wang H, Bai B, Chatziioannou AF. Optimization of the Energy Window for PETbox4, a Preclinical PET Tomograph With a Small Inner Diameter. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2014 Jun 01;61(3):1164-1173. doi: 10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326. PMID: 25774063; PMCID: PMC4356993.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2014 Jun 01;61(3):1164-1173. doi: 10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326.

Optimization of the Energy Window for PETbox4, a Preclinical PET Tomograph With a Small Inner Diameter.

IEEE transactions on nuclear science

Z Gu, Q Bao, R Taschereau, H Wang, B Bai, A F Chatziioannou

Affiliations

  1. Crump Institute for Molecular Imaging, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA.
  2. the Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90033 USA.

PMID: 25774063 PMCID: PMC4356993 DOI: 10.1109/TNS.2014.2321326

Abstract

Small animal positron emission tomography (PET) systems are often designed by employing close geometry configurations. Due to the different characteristics caused by geometrical factors, these tomographs require data acquisition protocols that differ from those optimized for conventional large diameter ring systems. In this work we optimized the energy window for data acquisitions with PETbox4, a 50 mm detector separation (box-like geometry) pre-clinical PET scanner, using the Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission (GATE). The fractions of different types of events were estimated using a voxelized phantom including a mouse as well as its supporting chamber, mimicking a realistic mouse imaging environment. Separate code was developed to extract additional information about the gamma interactions for more accurate event type classification. Three types of detector backscatter events were identified in addition to the trues, phantom scatters and randoms. The energy window was optimized based on the noise equivalent count rate (NECR) and scatter fraction (SF) with lower-level discriminators (LLD) corresponding to energies from 150 keV to 450 keV. The results were validated based on the calculated image uniformity, spillover ratio (SOR) and recovery coefficient (RC) from physical measurements using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) NU-4 image quality phantom. These results indicate that when PETbox4 is operated with a more narrow energy window (350-650 keV), detector backscatter rejection is unnecessary. For the NEMA NU-4 image quality phantom, the SOR for the water chamber decreases by about 45% from 15.1% to 8.3%, and the SOR for the air chamber decreases by 31% from 12.0% to 8.3% at the LLDs of 150 and 350 keV, without obvious change in uniformity, further supporting the simulation based optimization. The optimization described in this work is not limited to PETbox4, but also applicable or helpful to other small inner diameter geometry scanners.

Keywords: Backscatter; GATE; NECR; PET; PETbox4; SF; energy window; optimization

References

  1. Nucl Med Biol. 2001 Jul;28(5):585-93 - PubMed
  2. Mol Imaging Biol. 2011 Oct;13(5):949-61 - PubMed
  3. Phys Med Biol. 2012 Jul 7;57(13):4077-94 - PubMed
  4. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2002 Jan;29(1):98-114 - PubMed
  5. Med Phys. 2011 Mar;38(3):1660-71 - PubMed
  6. Phys Med Biol. 2006 May 7;51(9):2131-42 - PubMed
  7. J Nucl Med. 2005 Mar;46(3):455-63 - PubMed
  8. J Nucl Med. 2012 Aug;53(8):1300-9 - PubMed
  9. J Nucl Med. 2003 Feb;44(2):276-90 - PubMed
  10. Med Phys. 2007 Oct;34(10):3854-65 - PubMed
  11. Phys Med Biol. 2004 Oct 7;49(19):4543-61 - PubMed
  12. Appl Radiat Isot. 2013 May;75:105-14 - PubMed
  13. Neoplasia. 2000 Jan-Apr;2(1-2):118-38 - PubMed
  14. Phys Med. 2014 Feb;30(1):76-85 - PubMed
  15. Phys Med Biol. 2013 Jun 7;58(11):3791-814 - PubMed
  16. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Aug 1;97(16):9226-33 - PubMed
  17. Phys Med Biol. 2009 Apr 7;54(7):1893-908 - PubMed
  18. Phys Med Biol. 2005 Sep 7;50(17):4225-41 - PubMed
  19. Phys Med Biol. 2012 Oct 7;57(19):6063-77 - PubMed
  20. Acad Radiol. 2004 Jun;11(6):637-48 - PubMed
  21. Med Phys. 2009 Sep;36(9):4126-35 - PubMed
  22. Phys Med Biol. 2004 Jun 21;49(12 ):2527-45 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support