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.
Monte Carlo simulations of the count rate performance of a clinical whole-body MR/PET scanner
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.3193676
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/36/9/10.1118/1.3193676
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/36/9/10.1118/1.3193676

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

(a) Graphical representation of the modeled whole-body MR/PET tomograph. The model includes six rings of PET detector blocks (RTVC housing, LSO crystals, and glass light guide), the MR RF body coil (two GRP rings and one central GRP and foam ring), and the massive MR bed (with rails, cables, and copper housings). The NEMA NU-2 2001 phantom utilized to estimate count rate performance is also shown. (b) Axial view of the model. (c) Bottom view of the bed displaying the copper housings.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Scatter fraction of the system (including phantom, RF coil, and bed) as a function of the LLD for energy resolution values of 10%, 15%, and 20%. For comparison, scatter fraction values of two clinical PET/CT systems are included.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

True (a), scatter (b), and random (c) count rates as a function of activity concentration for dead-time values of 136, 432, and 1150 ns, respectively, and for time resolution values of 2.25 ns (coincidence time window of 4.5 ns) and 5 ns (coincidence time window of 10 ns). For comparison, the values measured for the Biograph HiRez are shown,

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Noise equivalent count rate curves as a function of activity concentration for dead-time values of 136 and 1150 ns, respectively, and for time resolution values of 2.25 ns (coincidence time window of 4.5 ns) and 5 ns (coincidence time window of 10 ns). The NECR values for the HiRez scanner (with the same energy window and coincidence window set to 4.5 ns) are shown.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Influence of MR scanner components on the overall scatter fraction for different settings of the LLD energy.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Probability distribution of the distance to the source of true and random LORs.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Global sensitivity values for a time resolution of 2.25 ns as a function of the LLD energy. The values correspond to an energy resolution of 15%.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Global sensitivity values for a time resolution of 5 ns as a function of the LLD energy. The values correspond to an energy resolution of 15%.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Distribution of double and triple counts as a function of the activity (4.5 ns coincidence window and LLD energy of 425 keV).

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Distribution of double and triple counts as a function of the activity (10 ns coincidence window and LLD energy of 425 keV).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/36/9/10.1118/1.3193676
2009-08-12
2014-04-23
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Monte Carlo simulations of the count rate performance of a clinical whole-body MR/PET scanner
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/36/9/10.1118/1.3193676
10.1118/1.3193676
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM