Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 33, Issue 1 , Pages 28-41, January 2003

Developments in instrumentation for emission computed tomography*

  • Margaret E. Daube-Witherspoon

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; USA
    • Department of Radiology, Yale University, New Haven, CT. USA
    • ,
  • I. George Zubal

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; USA
    • Department of Radiology, Yale University, New Haven, CT. USA
    • ,
  • Joel S. Karp

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; USA
    • Department of Radiology, Yale University, New Haven, CT. USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress reprint requests to Jol S. Karp, PhD, Department of Radiology, Division of Nuclear Medicine, 110 Donner, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia, PA 19104.

Article Outline

Instrumentation for emission computed tomography continues to evolve, taking advantage of developments in detector technology, data processing and correction methods, and reconstruction algorithms. This article reviews the basic principles and latest developments in emission computed tomography instrumentation, for both positron emission tomography and single-photon emission computed tomography applications.

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

 

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Cho ZH, Chan JK, Ericksson L, et al. Positron ranges obtained from biomedically important positron-emitting radionuclides. J Nucl Med. 1975;16:1174–1176
  2. Phelps M, Hoffman E, Huang S-C, et al. Effect of positron range on spatial resolution. J Nucl Med. 1975;16:649–652
  3. Bacharach S. The physics of positron emission tomography. In: Bermann SR, Sobel BE editor. Positron Emission Tomography of the Heart. Mount Kisco, NY: Futura Publishing Inc; 1992;p. 13–44
  4. De Beneditti S, Cowan CE, Konneker WR, et al. On the angular distribution of two-photon annihilation radiation. Phys Rev. 1950;77:205–212
  5. Phelps M, Hoffman EJ, Huang SC, et al. A new computerized tomographic imaging system for positron-emitting radiopharmaceuticals. J Nucl Med. 1978;19:635–647
  6. Ter-Pogossian M, Mullani NA, Hood JT, et al. Design considerations for a positron emission tomography (PETT-V) for imaging of brain. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1978;2:539–544
  7. Brooks RA, Sank VJ, DiChiro G, et al. Design of a high resolution positron emission tomograph: The Neuro-PET. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1980;4:5–13
  8. Hoffman E, Phelps ME, Huang SC. Performance evaluation of a positron tomograph designed for brain imaging. J Nucl Med. 1983;24:245–257
  9. Derenzo S, Huesman R, Cahoon J, et al. A positron tomography with 600 BGO crystals and 2.6 mm resolution. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1988;35:659–664
  10. Casey M, Nutt R. A multicrystal two dimensional BGO detector system for positron emission tomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1986;33:460–463
  11. DeGrado T, Turkington T, Williams J, et al. Performance characteristics of a whole-body PET scanner. J Nucl Med. 1994;35:1398–1406
  12. Lewellen T, Kohlmyer SG, Miyaoka RS, et al. Investigation of the performance of the General Electric ADVANCE positron emission tomograph in 3D mode. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1996;43:2199–2206
  13. Adam L-E, Zaers J, Ostertag H, et al. Performance evaluation of the whole-body PET scanner ECAT EXACT HR+ following the IEC standard. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:1172–1179
  14. Wong W-H, Uribe J, Hicks K, et al. An analog decoding BGO block detector using circular photomultipliers. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1995;42:1095–1101
  15. Anger H. Gamma-ray and positron scintillation camera. Nucleonics. 1963;21:10–56
  16. Muehllehner G, Karp JS. A positron camera using position-sensitive detectors: PENN-PET. J Nucl Med. 1986;27:90–98
  17. Karp J, Muehllehner G, Mankoff DA, et al. Continuous-slice PENN-PET: A positron tomograph with volume imaging capability. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:617–627
  18. Adam L-E, Karp JS, Daube-Witherspoon ME, et al. Performance of a whole-body PET scanner using curve-plate NaI(T1) detectors. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1821–1830
  19. Amsel G, Brosshard R, Zajde C. Shortening of detector signals in passive filters for pile-up reduction. Nucl Instr Methods. 1969;71:1–12
  20. Karp J, Muehllehner G, Beerbohm D, et al. Event localization in a continuous scintillation detector using digital processing. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1986;33:550–555
  21. Mankoff D, Muehllehner G, Miles GE. A local coincidence triggering system for PET tomographs composed of large-area position-sensitive detectors. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1990;37:730–736
  22. Burnham C, Bradshaw J, Kaufman D, et al. Positron tomograph employing a one dimension BGO scintillation camera. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1983;30:661–664
  23. Burnham C, Kaufman DE, Chesler DA, et al. Cylindrical PET detector design. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1988;35:675–679
  24. Surti S, Karp JS, Adam L-E, et al. Performance measurements for the GSO-based brain PET camera (G-PET). In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. San Diego, CA. 2001;
  25. Cherry S, Tornai MP, Levin CS, et al. A comparison of PET detector modules employing rectangular and round photomultiplier tubes. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1995;42:1064–1068
  26. Ishibashi H, Kurashige K, Kurata Y, et al. Scintillation performance of large Ce-doped Cd2SiO5 (GSO) single crystal. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Albuquerque, NM. 1997;
  27. Melcher C, Schweitzer JS. Cerium-doped lutetium oxyorthosilicate: A fast, efficient new scintillator. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1992;39:1161–1166
  28. van Eijk C. Inorganic scintillators in medical imaging. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:R85–R106
  29. Moszynski M, Kapusta M, Wolski D, et al. Energy resolution of scintillation detectors readout with large area avalanche photodiodes and photomultipliers. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1998;45:472–477
  30. Nelleman P, Hines H, Braymer W, et al. Performance characteristics of a dual head SPECT scanner with PET capability. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. San Francisco, CA. 1995;
  31. Wollenweber S, Tsui BMW, Lalush DS, et al. Initial characterization of the Siemens E.CAM+: A dual detector camera with coincidence imaging capability. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Toronto, Canada. 1998;
  32. Sossi V, Pointon B, Boudoux C, et al. NEMA NU 2-2000+ performance measurements on an ADAC MCD camera. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48:1518–1523
  33. Wienhard K, Eriksson L, Grootoonk S, et al. Performance evaluation of the positron scanner ECAT EXACT. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1992;16:804–813
  34. Townsend D, Byars L, Defrise M, et al. Rotating positron tomographs revisited. Phys Med Biol. 1994;39:401–410
  35. Townsend D, Geissbuhler A, Defrise M, et al. Fully three-dimensional reconstruction for a PET camera with retractable septa. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 1991;10:505–512
  36. Spinks T, Jones T, Bailey D, et al. Physical performance of a positron tomograph for brain imaging with retractable septa. Phys Med Biol. 1992;37:1637–1655
  37. Barrett H, White T, Parra LC. List-mode likelihood. J Opt Soc Am A. 1997;14:2914–2923
  38. Reader A, Erlandsson K, Flower M, Ott R. Fast accurate iterative reconstruction for low-statistics positron volume imaging. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43:835–846
  39. Bohm C, Eriksson L, Bergstrom M, et al. A computer assisted ring detector positron camera system for reconstruction tomography of the brain. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1978;25:624–637
  40. Muehllehner G, Karp J. Positron emission tomography imaging — Technical considerations. In: Semin Nucl Med. 16:1986;p. 35–50
  41. Budinger T, Derenzo S, Greenberg W, et al. Quantitative potentials of dynamic emission computed tomography. J Nucl Med. 1978;19:309–315
  42. Defrise M, Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, et al. Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3D PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 1997;11:145–158
  43. Daube-Witherspoon M, Matej S, Karp JS. Assessment of image quality with a fast fully 3D reconstruction algorithm. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. San Diego, CA. 2001;
  44. Casey ME, Hoffman EJ. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography: 7. A technique to reduce noise in accidental coincidence measurements and coincidence efficiency calibration. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1986;10:845–850
  45. Badawi R, Miller MP, Bailey DL, et al. Randoms variance reduction in 3D PET. Phys Med Biol. 1999;44:941–954
  46. Spinks T, Miller M, Bailey D, et al. The effect of activity outside the direct field of view in 3D-only whole-body positron tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43:895–904
  47. Hasegawa T, Murayama H, Nakajima Y, et al. A study of external end-shields for PET. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Seattle, WA. 1999;
  48. Thompson C, Kecani S, Boelen S. Evaluation of a neck shield for use during neurological studies with a whole-body PET scanner. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48:1512–1517
  49. Daube-Witherspoon M, Belakhlef A, Green SL, et al. Design of patient shielding to reduce the effects of out-of-field radioactivity in 3D PET. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Toronto, Canada. 1998;
  50. Cutler P, Laforest R. A prototype axial shield for use in 3D whole-body PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48:10–15
  51. Bergstrom M, Eriksson L, Bohm C, et al. Correction for scattered radiation in a ring detector positron camera by integral transformation of the projections. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1983;7:42–50
  52. Hoverath H, Kuebler W, Ostertag H, et al. Scatter correction in the transaxial slices of a whole-body positron emission tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 1993;38:717–728
  53. Bailey D, Meikle S. A convolution-subtraction scatter correction method for 3D PET. Phys Med Biol. 1994;39:411–424
  54. Ollinger J. Model-based scatter correction for fully 3-D PET. Phys Med Biol. 1996;41:153–176
  55. Watson C, Newport D, Casey ME, et al. Evaluation of simulationbased scatter correction for 3-D PET cardiac imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:90–97
  56. Strother S, Casey ME, Hoffman EJ. Measuring PET scanner sensitivity: Relating count rates to image signal-to-noise ratios using noise equivalent counts. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1990;37:783–788
  57. Carroll L, Kertz P, Orcut G. The orbiting rod source: Improving performance in PET transmission correction scans. In: Esser P editors. Emission Computed Tomography—Current Trends. New York, NY: Society of Nuclear Medicine; 1983;
  58. Daube-Witherspoon M, Carson R, Green M. Postinjection transmission attenuation measurements for PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1988;35:757–761
  59. (abstr) Carson R, Daube-Witherspoon M, Jacobs G, et al. Validation of postinjection transmission measurements for PET. J Nucl Med. 1989;30:825
  60. Xu M, Luk W, Cutler P, et al. Local threshold for segmented attenuation correction of PET imaging of the thorax. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1994;41:1532–1537
  61. Bettinardi V, Pagani E, Gilardi MC, et al. An automatic classification technique for attenuation correction in positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:447–458
  62. deKemp R, Nahmias C. Attenuation correction in PET using single photon transmission measurement. Med Phys. 1994;21:771–778
  63. Smith R, Karp J, Muehllehner G, et al. Singles transmission scans performed post-injection for quantitative whole-body PET imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:1329–1335
  64. Karp J, Muehllehner G, Qu H, et al. Singles transmission in volume imaging PET with a Cs-137 source. Phys Med Biol. 1995;40:929–944
  65. Beyer T, Townsend D, Brun T, et al. A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1369–1379
  66. Wienhard K, Schmand M, Casey M, et al. The ECAT HRRT: Performance and first clinical application of the new high resolution research tomograph. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2002;49:104–110
  67. Anger H, Mortimer RK, Tobias CA. Visualization of gamma-ray emitting isotopes in the human body. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy. 1956;
  68. Leong L, Kruger RL, O'Connor MK. A comparison of the uniformity requirements for SPECT image reconstruction using FBP and OSEM techniques. J Nucl Med Technol. 2001;29:79–83
  69. O'Connor M. Instrument- and computer-related problems and artifacts in nuclear medicine. In: Semin Nucl Med. 26:1996;p. 256–277
  70. Spector S, Brookeman VA, Kylstra CD, et al. Analysis and correction of spatial distortions produced by the gamma camera. J Nucl Med. 1972;13:307–312
  71. (editorial comment) Perry R. Analysis and correction of spatial distortions produced by the gamma camera. J Nucl Med. 1973;14:125–126
  72. Padikal T, Ashare AB, Kereiakes JG. Field flood uniformity correction: Benefits or pitfalls?. J Nucl Med. 1976;17:653–656
  73. Koral K, Schrader ME, Knoll GF. A measure of Anger-camera linearity: Results with and without a corrector. J Nucl Med. 1981;22:1069–1074
  74. Lee K. Quantitative assessment of linearity of scintillation cameras. Radiology. 1980;136:790–792
  75. Stoddart HF, Stoddart HA. A new development in single gamma transaxial tomography—Union Carbide focused collimator scanner. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1979;26:2710–2712
  76. Stoddart HA, Stoddart HF. New multi-dimensional reconstructions for the 12-detectors, scanned focal point, single-photon tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 1992;37:579–586
  77. (abstr) Smith A, Genna S. Imaging characteristics of ASPECT, a singlecrystal ring camera for dedicated brain SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1989;30:796
  78. Massie B, Wisneski JA, Hollenberg M, et al. Quantitative analysis of seven-pinhole tomographic thallium-201 scintigrams: Improved sensitivity and estimation of the extent of coronary involvement by evaluation of radiotracer uptake and clearance. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;3:1178–1186
  79. Noelpp U, Roesler H, Ritter EP, et al. Myocardial [18F]FDG tomography using a conventional gamma camera and a seven pinhole collimator. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1994;18:102–109
  80. Liu Z, Kastis GA, Stevenson GD, et al. Quantitative analysis of acute myocardial infarct in rat hearts with ischemia-reperfusion using a high-resolution stationary SPECT system. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:933–939
  81. Chang L. A method for attenuation correction in radionuclide computed tomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1978;25:638–643
  82. Bailey D. Transmission scanning in emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998;25:774–787
  83. Muehllehner G, Buchin MP, Dudek JH. Performance parameters of a positron imaging camera. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1976;23:528–537
  84. Mankoff D, Muehllehner G, Karp J. The high count rate performance of a two-dimensionally position-sensitive detector for positron emission tomography. Phys Med Biol. 1989;34:437–456
  85. Wong W-H, Li H, Uribe J, et al. Feasibility of a high-speed gamma-camera design using the high-yield-pileup-event-recovery method. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:624–632
  86. Singh M. An electronically collimated gamma camera for single photon emission computed tomography. Part I: Theoretical considerations and design criteria. Med Phys. 1983;10:421–427
  87. Singh M, Doria D. An electronically collimated gamma camera for single photon emission computed tomography. Part II: Image reconstruction and preliminary experimental measurements. Med Phys. 1983;10:428–435
  88. Hua C, LeBlanc JW, Clinthorne NH, et al. A data acquisition system for a ring Compton camera. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Lyon, France. 2000;
  89. Conka-Nurdan T, Constantinescu F, Freisleben B, et al. Influence of the detector parameters on a Compton camera. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Lyon, France. 2000;
  90. Meier D, Czermak A, Jalocha P, et al. Silicon detector for a Compton camera in nuclear medical imaging. In: IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference Record. Lyon, France. 2000;
  91. Yang Y, Gono Y, Motomura S, et al. A Compton camera for multitracer imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48:656–661
  92. Wilderman S, Fessler JA, Clinthorne NH, et al. Improved modeling of system response in list mode EM reconstruction of Compton scatter camera images. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2001;48:111–116
  93. Chelikani S. In: Design and Optimization of a Compton Camera for Nuclear Medicine Applications. New Haven, CT: Department of Applied Physics, Yale University; 2001;

* Supported by Department of Energy Grant DE-FG02-88ER60642 (M.E.D.-W., J.S.K.).

PII: S0001-2998(03)80004-1

doi:10.1053/snuc.2003.127295

Seminars in Nuclear Medicine
Volume 33, Issue 1 , Pages 28-41, January 2003

Article Tools