Development of the LBNL positron emission mammography camera

Huber, J.; Choong, Woon-Seng; Wang, J.; Maltz, Jonathan S.; Qi, Jinyi; Mandelli, E.; Moses, W.W.

doi:10.1109/tns.2003.817941

Cited by 27 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Much effort has been devoted to develop depth-encoding PET detectors over the past several years (Inadama et al , 2006; Moses and Derenzo, 1994; Saoudi et al , 1999; Tsuda et al , 2004; Dokhale et al , 2004; Du et al , 2007; Burr et al , 2004; Zhang et al , 2003) to minimize the DOI effect. Dedicated small animal (Wang et al , 2006), human brain (Wienhard et al , 2002; Eriksson et al , 2002) and human breast (Huber et al , 2003) PET scanners have now been developed that utilize some form of depth-encoding detectors. With improving DOI resolution, one challenge in implementing these DOI detectors in a PET scanner is the need to accurately calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for large numbers of detector elements such that coincidence events are placed in the projection data as accurately as possible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

Yang

et al. 2008

Phys. Med. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many laboratories are developing depth-encoding detectors to improve the trade-off between spatial resolution and sensitivity in positron emission tomography (PET) scanners. One challenge in implementing these detectors is the need to calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for the large numbers of detector elements in a scanner. In this work, we evaluate two different methods, a linear detector calibration and a linear crystal calibration, for determining DOI calibration parameters. Both methods can use measurements from any source distribution and location, or even the intrinsic LSO background activity, and are therefore well-suited for use in a depth-encoding PET scanner. The methods were evaluated by measuring detector and crystal DOI responses for all eight detectors in a prototype depth-encoding PET scanner. The detectors utilize dual-ended read out of lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) scintillator arrays with position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes (PSAPDs). The LSO arrays have 7×7 elements, with a crystal size of 0.92×0.92×20 mm 3 and pitch of 1.0 mm. The arrays are read out by two 8×8 mm 2 area PSAPDs placed at opposite ends of the arrays. DOI is measured by the ratio of the amplitude of the total energy signals measured by the two PSAPDs. Small variations were observed in the DOI responses of different crystals within an array as well as DOI responses for different arrays. A slightly nonlinear dependence of the DOI ratio on depth was observed and the nonlinearity was larger for the corner and edge crystals. The DOI calibration parameters were obtained from the DOI responses measured in singles mode. The average error between the calibrated DOI and the known DOI was 0.8 mm if a linear detector DOI calibration was used, and 0.5 mm if a linear crystal DOI calibration was used. A line source phantom and a hot rod phantom were scanned on the prototype PET scanner. DOI measurement significantly improved the image spatial resolution no matter which DOI calibration method was used. A linear crystal DOI calibration provided slightly better image spatial resolution compared with a linear detector DOI calibration.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

Yang

et al. 2008

Phys. Med. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The index of refraction of the silicone oil is 1.40. A reference detector consisting of a 40 9 20 9 1.0 mm 3 LYSO slab coupled to a Hamamatsu R9800 single PMT and a 0.25 mm diameter 22 Na point source were mounted on a translation table. The LYSO arrays were measured in both singles and coincidence modes.…”

Section: C Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The dual-ended PET detector was first introduced by Moses using photodiode arrays as the photodetector to develop detectors for a positron emission mammography scanner. 14,22 Then, the detector technique was further studied by several groups include us using avalanche photodiodes (APDs) arrays 15 and position sensitive APDs. 16,17,23,24 Prototype small animal PET scanners were also built and it was demonstrated that uniform high spatial resolution can be achieved using dual-ended readout detector.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of depth encoding small animal PET detectors using dual‐ended readout of pixelated scintillator arrays with SiPMs

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other dedicated PET scanners are being developed for breast cancer [2]- [8] and prostate cancer [9]. The design concept of using high-resolution detector inserts in coincidence with general-purpose whole-body PET scanners, proposed by Tai, et al [10], may provide a more cost-efficient way to achieve high-resolution PET images within a smaller field-of-view (FOV).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A simulation study for the design of a prototype insert for whole-body PET scanners

Janecek

Tai

2006

IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are developing an insert device that will improve image resolution within a smaller field-of-view for clinical wholebody PET scanners. We modified SimSET (Simulation System for Emission Tomography) to simulate the insert and a PET scanner. The system consists of two detector rings. The inner ring represents an insert (r = 153 mm) with high-resolution detectors using 10 mm thick LSO. The outer ring represents a PET scanner (R = 413 mm) with 25 mm thick LSO. Events were binned into three sets of sinograms assuming a 2.4 and 6.75 mm crystal-pitch for the insert and the PET scanner, respectively. The detectors in the insert are modeled as 1, 2, or 4 layers with different offset configurations to evaluate the corresponding system resolution with the depth-ofinteraction (DOI) effect. Results show that image resolution at 1 cm radial offset is improved from 5.6 mm full-width-at-half-maximum (FWHM) of the original PET scanner to 2.0 mm with the insert. At 12 cm offset, the resolution of the original system is 5.9 and 5.5 mm for radial and tangential directions, respectively. With the insert, the radial resolution is 5.0 mm FWHM for a single-layer detector design, but improves to 2.7 and 2.2 mm for 2-and 4-layer DOI detectors, respectively. Different offsets for multi-layer detectors have negligible effect on resolution. Sensitivity of the device is, assuming the insert has a 2 cm axial extend, estimated to be 3.3%, including coincidence events from the insert-alone and insert-to-scanner sinograms. In contrast, if the insert is used as a stand-alone microPET scanner, its sensitivity is 1.3%.Index Terms-Depth of interaction (DOI), head and neck imaging, high resolution imaging, Monte Carlo simulations, pseudo pinhole positron emission tomography (PET).

show abstract

Development of the LBNL positron emission mammography camera

Cited by 27 publications

References 15 publications

Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

Development of depth encoding small animal PET detectors using dual‐ended readout of pixelated scintillator arrays with SiPMs

A simulation study for the design of a prototype insert for whole-body PET scanners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About