Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Acceptance testing for nuclear medicine instrumentation

  • Guidelines
  • Published:
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 1. Performance measurement of scintillation cameras. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2001, 2007.

  2. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 60789. Medical electrical equipment – Characteristics and test conditions of radionuclide imaging devices – Anger type gamma cameras. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission; 2005.

  3. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 61675-2. Radionuclide imaging devices – Characteristics and test conditions – Part 2: Single photon emission computed tomographs. Consolidated Edition 1.1. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission; 2005.

  4. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 61675-3. Radionuclide imaging devices – Characteristics and test conditions – Part 3: Gamma camera based whole body imaging systems. Ed 1. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission; 1998.

  5. Deutsches Institut für Normung. DIN 6855-2:2005-01. Quality control of nuclear medicine instruments. Part 2: Constancy testing of single crystal gamma-cameras used in planar scintigraphy and in Anger type gamma cameras with rotating detector heads used in single photon emission tomography. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Normung.

  6. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality assurance for SPECT systems. Human Health Series No. 6. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2009. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1394_web.pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  7. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality control atlas for scintillation camera systems. ISBN 92-0-101303-5. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2003. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1141_web.pdf (low resolution images). Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  8. Hines H, Kayayan R, Colsher J, Hashimoto D, Schubert R, Fernando J, et al. Recommendations for implementing SPECT instrumentation quality control. Nuclear Medicine Section – National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA). Eur Nucl Med 1999;26(5):527–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Busemann-Sokole E. Measurement of collimator hole angulation and camera head tilt for slant and parallel hole collimators used in SPECT. J Nucl Med 1987;28:1592–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Blokland JA, Camps JA, Pauwels EK. Aspects of performance assessment of whole body imaging systems. Eur J Nucl Med 1997;24(10):1273–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 2. Performance measurements of positron emission tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 1994, 2007.

  12. Turkington TG. Introduction to PET instrumentation. J Nucl Med Technol 2001;29:4–11.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fahey FH. Data acquisition in PET imaging. J Nucl Med Technol 2002;30:39–49.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Daube-Witherspoon ME, Karp JS, Casey ME, DiFilippo FP, Hines H, Muehllehner G, et al. PET performance measurements using the NEMA NU 2-2001 standard. J Nucl Med 2002;43(10):1398–409.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. von Schulthess GK. Positron emission tomography versus positron emission tomography/computed tomography: from “unclear” to “new-clear” medicine. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6(4):183–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC/TR 61948. Nuclear medicine instrumentation – Routine tests – Part 3: Positron emission tomographs. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission; 2005.

  17. Bergmann H, Dobrozemsky G, Minear G, Nicoletti R, Samal M. An inter-laboratory comparison study of image quality of PET scanners using the NEMA NU-2 2001 procedure for assessment of image quality. Phys Med Biol 2005;50:2193–207.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Zanzonico P. Routine quality control of clinical nuclear medicine instrumentation: a brief review. J Nucl Med 2008;49(7):1114–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality assurance for PET and PET/CT systems. Human Health Series, No. 1. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2009. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1393_web.pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  20. Lin PJP, Beck TJ, Borras C, et al. Specification and acceptance testing of computed tomography scanners. New York: American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Shepard SJ, Lin PJP, Boone JM, et al. Quality control in diagnostic radiology. College Park: American Association of Physicists in Medicine; 2002. p. 1–74.

    Google Scholar 

  22. American College of Radiology. Technical standard for medical nuclear physics performance monitoring of PET-CT imaging equipment. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology. http://www.acr.org/SecondaryMainMenuCategories/quality_safety/guidelines/med_phys/pet_ct_equipment.aspx. Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  23. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality assurance for radioactivity measurement in nuclear medicine (appendix VII), Technical Report Series No. 454. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2006. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/TRS454_web.pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  24. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC/TR 61948 series. Nuclear medicine instrumentation – Routine tests – Part 4: Radionuclide calibrators (IEC 2006-11). Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission.

  25. Deutsches Institut für Normung. DIN 6855-11:2009-05. Constancy testing of nuclear medicine measuring systems – part 11: Radionuclide calibrators (IEC/TR 61948-4:2006, modified). Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Normung.

  26. Gadd R, Baker M, Nijran KS, Owens S, Thomas W, Woods MJ, et al. Protocol for establishing and maintaining the calibration of medical radionuclide calibrators and their quality control. Measurement Good Practice Guide No. 93. Teddington, UK: National Physical Laboratory; 2006. http://resource.npl.co.uk/cgi-bin/download.pl?area=npl_publications&path_name=/npl_web/pdf/mgpg93.pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2009

  27. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality control of nuclear medicine instruments 1991. Technical document 602. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1991. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_602_web.pdf). Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  28. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality control of nuclear medicine instruments. Technical document 317. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1984. http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/te_317_prn.pdf. Accessed 15 Dec 2009.

  29. Deutsches Institut für Normung. DIN 6855-1: 2009-07. Constancy testing of nuclear medicine measuring systems – Part 1: Radiation counting systems for measurements in vivo and in vitro (IEC/TR 61948–1:2001, modified). Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Normung.

  30. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 3. Performance measurements and quality control guidelines for non-imaging intraoperative gamma probes, Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2004.

  31. Zanzonico P, Heller S. The intraoperative gamma probe: basic principles and choices available. Semin Nucl Med 2000;30(1):33–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Halkar RK, Aarsvold JN. Intraoperative probes. J Nucl Med Technol 1999;27(3):188–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Britten AJ. A method to evaluate intra-operative gamma probes for sentinel lymph node localisation. Eur J Nucl Med 1999;26(2):76–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Perkins AC, Britten AJ. Specification and performance of intra-operative gamma probes for sentinel node detection. Nucl Med Commun 1999;20(4):309–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tiourina T, Arends B, Huysmans D, Rutten H, Lemaire B, Muller S. Evaluation of surgical gamma probes for radioguided sentinel node localization. Eur J Nucl Med 1998;25(9):1224–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cherry SR, Sorensen JA, Phelps ME. Physics in nuclear medicine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders/Elsevier Science; 2003. ISBN 0-7216-8341-X.

    Google Scholar 

  37. National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NEMA NU 4. Performance measurement of small animal positron emission tomographs. Rosslyn, VA: National Electrical Manufacturers Association; 2008.

  38. International Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 61223-1. Evaluation and routine testing in medical imaging departments – Part 1: General aspects. Geneva: International Electrotechnical Commission; 1993.

  39. Bergmann H, Minear G, Raith M, Schaffarich PM. Multiple window spatial registration error of a gamma camera: 133Ba point source as a replacement of the NEMA procedure. BMC Med Phys 2008;8:6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kwang K, Lee B, Choe J. SU-FF-I-79: development of the practical guidelines of PET-CT quality control. Med Phys 2009;36:2452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. ImPACT Information Leaflet No. 1: CT Scanner Acceptance Testing, Version 1.02, 18/05/01, http://www.impactscan.org/reports.htm.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the other members of the EANM Physics Committee (M. Nowak Lonsdale, T. Beyer, B. Sattler, A. Del Guerra, R. Boellaard, W. Eschner) for their constructive input. The EANM Physics Committee also wishes to acknowledge all those who participated in the Questionnaire on Quality Control Practice in Europe for Nuclear Medicine Instrumentation (February 2008).

The comments during the review process from the EANM Dosimetry Committee, and the following individuals are appreciated: A.J. Arends (The Netherlands), M. Brambilla (Italy), B. Cari (Spain), S. Christofides (Cyprus), S. Fanti (Italy), B. Farman (France), A. Frenkel (Israel), J. Holzmannhofer (Austria), L. Jødal (Denmark), W. Langsteger (Austria), J. McCavana (Republic of Ireland), O. Mundler (France), F. Pons (Spain), A. Savi (Italy), S.-Å. Starck (Sweden), W. Tindale (United Kingdom), A. Torresin (Italy; on behalf of EFOMP), P. Trindev (Bulgaria), J. Varga (Hungary).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Ellinor Busemann Sokole

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Medical University, Łódz, Poland

    Anna Płachcínska

  3. Department of Medical Physics and Bioengineering, St. George’s Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK

    Alan Britten

Authors
  1. Ellinor Busemann Sokole
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Płachcínska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alan Britten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

on behalf of the EANM Physics Committee

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ellinor Busemann Sokole.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Busemann Sokole, E., Płachcínska, A., Britten, A. et al. Acceptance testing for nuclear medicine instrumentation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37, 672–681 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-009-1348-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-009-1348-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation