A Technique To Reject Scattered Radiation In PET Transmission Scans

It is well known that scattered radiation in PET reduces the contrast in images. There is about the same fraction of scattered events in both emission and transmission scans. The technique presented here reduces the scatter fraction in transmission scans. An orbiting rod source is used in place of the ring source normally used for transmission scans. The source moves in steps rather than in a continuous motion. At each point only coincidences between detector pairs for which the source and detectors are co-linear are accepted. In this way all wide angle scatter is rejected. The attenuation coefficient for water at 511 keV was measured as .095 cm-1 with the orbiting source compared to .086 cm-1 with a conventional source and the value due to the electron density of water .097 cm-1 The recovery coefficient for hollow cylinders 23 mm in diameter increased from 77% for a conventional to 93% for a rod source transmission scan. If the source is collimated to a flat fan beam, a much higher activity could be used, and transmission scans could be performed independent of activity in the patient section being scanned.

[1]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Testing quantitation in PET , 1984 .

[2]  M R Palmer,et al.  Scatter distribution in transmission measurements with positron emission tomography. , 1986, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[3]  C. Bohm,et al.  Correction for Scattered Radiation in a Ring Detector Positron Camera by Integral Transformation of the Projections , 1983, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[4]  M. Ter-pogossian,et al.  PETT VI: A Positron Emission Tomograph Utilizing Cesium Fluoride Scintillation Detectors , 1982, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[5]  C Bohm,et al.  Corrections for Attenuation, Scattered Radiation, and Random Coincidences in a Ring Detector Positron Emission Transaxial Tomograph , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[6]  E. Hoffman,et al.  A BOUNDARY METHOD FOR ATTENUATION CORRECTION IN POSITRON COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY , 1981, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[7]  B E Cooke,et al.  A Phantom to Assess Quantitative Recovery of Positron Tomographs , 1983, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[8]  Ronald J. Jaszczak,et al.  Estimating Spect Count Densities, Scatter Fractions, and Statistical Noise , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[9]  Ronald H. Huesman,et al.  The Donner 280-Crystal High Resolution Positron Tomograph , 1979, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[10]  Ronald H. Huesman,et al.  Imaging Properties of a Positron Tomograph with 280 Bgo Crystals , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[11]  C. J. Thompson,et al.  Real-Time Data Rebinning in PET to Obtain Uniformly Sampled Projections , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[12]  A. M. Sendyk,et al.  Performance Figures and Images from the Therascan 3128 Positron Emission Tomograph , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[13]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Imaging Performance of a Dynamic Positron Emission Tomograph: Positome IIIp , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[14]  Mats Bergström Performance evaluation and improvements of quantitation accuracy in transmission and positron emission computer assisted tomography , 1982 .

[15]  L. R. Lupton,et al.  Performance Study of Single-Slice Positron Emission Tomography Scanners by Monte Carlo Techniques , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.