HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Adam, L.-E. Articles by Smith, R. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Adam, L.-E. Articles by Smith, R. J.

Performance of a Whole-Body PET Scanner Using Curve-Plate NaI(Tl) Detectors

Lars-Eric Adam, Joel S. Karp, Margaret E. Daube-Witherspoon and Robin J. Smith

Department of Radiology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

View larger version (119K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 1. (A) C-PET scanner. (B) CurvePlate crystal (Bicron, Newbury, OH) with 48 photomultiplier tubes. Dimensions of crystal are 47 cm (circumferential) x 30 cm (axial) x 2.54 cm (thick).

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 2. Transaxial (A) and axial (B) views of phantom setup for image-quality measurement. Four smallest spheres are hot, and 2 largest spheres are cold. Foam insert has density of 0.3 g/mL.

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 3. NU2-2001 scatter fraction as function of axial position.

View larger version (47K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 4. C-PET count-rate behavior for 19-cm uniform cylinder (A), IEC cardiac count-rate phantom (B), IEC abdomen count-rate phantom (C), 70-cm uniform cylinder (D), and line source in 70-cm cylinder (E) (activity concentration is normalized to phantom volume of 22 L). Activity concentrations differ because of differences in phantom volume and size. (F) Comparison of phantom count rates with clinical count rates. Patient data are represented by small dots (>2,000 data points). For this plot, all measurements were processed like clinical data, using background subtraction and full transverse FOV (576 mm). This explains higher total count rate of phantom data shown in A–E. NEC = noise equivalent count rate; NU-2 = NU2-1994.

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 5. Count-loss analysis.

View larger version (39K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 6. Image-quality phantom with sphere-to-background ratio of 8:1 for 3 scan durations: 3 min (A), 6 min (B), and 12 min (C).

View larger version (67K): [in a new window]   FIGURE 7. Representative coronal slice of FDG whole-body study.