1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Validation of GATE Monte Carlo simulations of the GE Advance/Discovery LS PET scanners
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.2089447
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/1/10.1118/1.2089447
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/1/10.1118/1.2089447

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

GATE simulation model of the GE Advance/Discovery LS PET scanner. The proximal end shield, the couch, and the Mylar cover are depicted via wire-frame lines. In addition, an expanded view of the detector module, block, and crystal arrangement is shown.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Typical signal processing chain simulated by GATE used to convert the particle interactions within the detectors into coincidence counts.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Virtual NEMA phantoms used in the simulation. From left to right and top to bottom: NEMA NU2-200117 scatter fraction, sensitivity, spatial resolution, and the NEMA 1994/SNM16,15 scatter fraction phantoms.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Comparison of the scatter fraction values from the NEMA analysis to those determined from direct binning of the Monte Carlo data for a simulation without the couch.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

3D mode count rate response showing both simulated (GATE, dotted lines) and experimental data (Kohlmyer et al.,41 solid lines, and NYH DLS, dashed lines).

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Comparison of the estimated single count rates calculated from Eqs. (1), (5), and (7) (lines) to those produced by GATE (symbols) as a function of activity. In this figure, S̱0 represents the single rate with no deadtime. S̱1, and S̱2 are the single rates with successive deadtimes applied to the Block and Module subsets of the scanner’s geometry, respectively. No energy window cuts are used in these simulations.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Comparison of the predicted random count rates calculated from Eqs. (4), (6), and (8) (lines) to those produced by GATE (symbols) as a function of activity. In this figure, Ṟ0 represents the random rates with no deadtime. Ṟ1 and Ṟ2 are the random rates with successive deadtimes applied to the Block and Module subsets of the scanner’s geometry, respectively. No energy window cuts are used in these simulations.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Indexing scheme used by GATE to define detector locations within a Module. Note that the scanner has 56 Modules, each containing 6 blocks, which in turn contain 36 crystals each.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Simple example that shows the sinogram indexing for two projection planes of a scanner with 16 detectors that interlaces with into .

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Default GEANT4 physics data libraries.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

NEMA Protocols used in this study.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Comparison of 3D sensitivity measurements between the GE Advance/Discovery LS scanner and the GATE simulation with and without efficiency corrections.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Comparison of scatter fractions for the NEMA/SNM, NEMA NU2-1994, and NEMA NU2-2001 protocols.

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

3D spatial resolution measurements of the GE Discovery LS PET scanner performed at New York Hospital compared to the results of a GATE simulation reconstructed with STIR without and with spatial crystal blurring.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/1/10.1118/1.2089447
2005-12-28
2014-04-25
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Validation of GATE Monte Carlo simulations of the GE Advance/Discovery LS PET scanners
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/33/1/10.1118/1.2089447
10.1118/1.2089447
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM