PET detector using waveshifting optical fibers and microchannel plate PMT with delay line readout

Williams, Mark B.; Sealock, R.M.; Majewski, S.; Weisenberger, A.G.

doi:10.1109/23.664171

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An increasing number of PET cameras optimized to image the breast have been proposed or constructed [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. These cameras, commonly known as Positron Emission Mammography or PEM cameras, restrict the field of view to a single breast, and are expected to have higher performance and lower cost than a conventional PET camera.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instrumentation optimization for positron emission mammography

Moses

2004

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The past several years have seen designs for PET cameras optimized to image the breast, commonly known as Positron Emission Mammography or PEM cameras. The guiding principal behind PEM instrumentation is that a camera whose field of view is restricted to a single breast has higher performance and lower cost than a conventional PET camera. The most common geometry is a pair of parallel planes of detector modules, although geometries that encircle the breast have also been proposed. The ability of the detector modules to measure the depth of interaction (DOI) is also a relevant feature. This paper finds that while both the additional solid angle coverage afforded by encircling the breast and the decreased blurring afforded by the DOI measurement improve performance, the ability to measure DOI is more important than the ability to encircle the breast.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Instrumentation optimization for positron emission mammography

Moses

2004

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of dedicated PET cameras optimized to image the breast have been proposed or constructed [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. These cameras, commonly known as Positron Emission Mammography or PEM cameras, restrict the field of view to a single breast, and have higher performance and lower cost than a conventional PET camera.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positron Emission Mammography imaging

Moses¹

2004

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines current trends in Positron Emission Mammography (PEM) instrumentation and the performance tradeoffs inherent in them. The most common geometry is a pair of parallel planes of detector modules. They subtend a larger solid angle around the breast than conventional PET cameras, and so have both higher efficiency and lower cost. Extensions to this geometry include encircling the breast, measuring the depth of interaction (DOI), and dual-modality imaging (PEM and x-ray mammography, as well as PEM and x-ray guided biopsy). The ultimate utility of PEM may not be decided by instrument performance, but by biological and medical factors, such as the patient to patient variation in radiotracer uptake or the as yet undetermined role of PEM in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment.

show abstract

“…The past several years have seen a number of designs for PET cameras optimized to image the breast [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9], commonly known as Positron Emission Mammography or PEM cameras. The guiding principal behind PEM instrumentation is that a camera whose field of view is restricted to a single breast will have significantly higher performance and lower cost than a conventional PET camera.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fundamental limits of positron emission mammography

Moses

2003

Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explore the causes of performance limitation in positron emission mammography cameras. We compare two basic camera geometries containing the same volume of 511 keV photon detectors, one with a parallel plane geometry and another with a rectangular geometry. We find that both geometries have similar performance for the phantom imaged (in Monte Carlo simulation), even though the solid angle coverage of the rectangular camera is about 50% higher than the parallel plane camera. The reconstruction algorithm used significantly affects the resulting image; iterative methods significantly outperform the commonly used focal plane tomography. Finally, the characteristics of the tumor itself, specifically the absolute amount of radiotracer taken up by the tumor, will significantly affect the imaging performance.

show abstract

PET detector using waveshifting optical fibers and microchannel plate PMT with delay line readout

Cited by 15 publications

References 30 publications

Instrumentation optimization for positron emission mammography

Instrumentation optimization for positron emission mammography

Positron Emission Mammography imaging

Fundamental limits of positron emission mammography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About