AAPM Task Group 108: PET and PET/CT shielding requirements.

The shielding of positron emission tomography (PET) and PET/CT (computed tomography) facilities presents special challenges. The 0.511 MeV annihilation photons associated with positron decay are much higher energy than other diagnostic radiations. As a result, barrier shielding may be required in floors and ceilings as well as adjacent walls. Since the patient becomes the radioactive source after the radiopharmaceutical has been administered, one has to consider the entire time that the subject remains in the clinic. In this report we present methods for estimating the shielding requirements for PET and PET/CT facilities. Information about the physical properties of the most commonly used clinical PET radionuclides is summarized, although the report primarily refers to fluorine-18. Typical PET imaging protocols are reviewed and exposure rates from patients are estimated including self-attenuation by body tissues and physical decay of the radionuclide. Examples of barrier calculations are presented for controlled and noncontrolled areas. Shielding for adjacent rooms with scintillation cameras is also discussed. Tables and graphs of estimated transmission factors for lead, steel, and concrete at 0.511 MeV are also included. Meeting the regulatory limits for uncontrolled areas can be an expensive proposition. Careful planning with the equipment vendor, facility architect, and a qualified medical physicist is necessary to produce a cost effective design while maintaining radiation safety standards.

[1]  Christian Vanhove,et al.  Optimal dose of 18F-FDG required for whole-body PET using an LSO PET camera , 2003, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[2]  Fawcett,et al.  Occupational Exposure in Nuclear Medicine and PET. , 2000, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

[3]  N L McElroy,et al.  Worker dose analysis based on real time dosimetry. , 1998, Health physics.

[4]  P. Alagona,et al.  Regional distribution of 2-deoxy-2[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose for metabolic imaging using positron emission tomography , 1994, The International Journal of Cardiac Imaging.

[5]  J S Karp,et al.  Design considerations for PET scanners. , 2002, The quarterly journal of nuclear medicine : official publication of the Italian Association of Nuclear Medicine (AIMN) [and] the International Association of Radiopharmacology.

[6]  S C Bushong,et al.  Diagnostic X-ray shielding design based on an empirical model of photon attenuation. , 1983, Health physics.

[7]  D J Simpkin,et al.  Shielding requirements for constant-potential diagnostic x-ray beams determined by a Monte Carlo calculation. , 1989, Health physics.

[8]  D Christman,et al.  The radiation dosimetry of 2 [F-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose in man. , 1982, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[9]  R. Marchesini,et al.  Radiation dose to technicians per nuclear medicine procedure: comparison between technetium-99m, gallium-67, and iodine-131 radiotracers and fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose , 1997, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Michael D Harpen Positronium: review of symmetry, conserved quantities and decay for the radiological physicist. , 2004, Medical physics.

[11]  A Bixler,et al.  Practical aspects of radiation safety for using fluorine-18. , 1999, Journal of nuclear medicine technology.

[12]  M. O'Doherty,et al.  Radiation dose rates from patients undergoing PET: implications for technologists and waiting areas. , 2000, European journal of nuclear medicine.

[13]  J C Courtney,et al.  Photon shielding for a positron emission tomography suite. , 2001, Health physics.

[14]  J. Machac,et al.  Pet myocardial perfusion and glucose metabolism imaging: Part 2-guidelines for interpretation and reporting , 2003, Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.

[15]  Paul K. Marsden,et al.  Are restrictions to behaviour of patients required following fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomographic studies? , 1999, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[16]  V A McCormick,et al.  Radiation dose to positron emission tomography technologists during quantitative versus qualitative studies. , 1993, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[17]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  PET myocardial glucose metabolism and perfusion imaging: Part 1-Guidelines for data acquisition and patient preparation. , 2003, Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.

[18]  Brian M Methé,et al.  Shielding Design for a PET Imaging Suite: A Case Study , 2003, Health physics.

[19]  Benjamin W Zeff,et al.  Patient self-attenuation and technologist dose in positron emission tomography. , 2005, Medical physics.

[20]  T. Berthold,et al.  Radiation exposure to sonographers from fluorine-18-FDG PET patients. , 2000, Journal of nuclear medicine technology.

[21]  Thea M Lundberg,et al.  Measuring and minimizing the radiation dose to nuclear medicine technologists. , 2002, Journal of nuclear medicine technology.

[22]  K. Kearfott,et al.  Radiation protection design for a clinical positron emission tomography imaging suite. , 1992, Health physics.

[23]  F H Fahey,et al.  Positron emission tomography instrumentation. , 2001, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[24]  W B Tindale,et al.  Dose rate measurements from radiopharmaceuticals: implications for nuclear medicine staff and for children with radioactive parents. , 1999, Nuclear medicine communications.

[25]  N J Yasillo,et al.  Radiation safety considerations for PET centers. , 1997, Journal of nuclear medicine technology.

[26]  M. A. Smith,et al.  The impact of PET scanning on management of paediatric oncology patients , 2004, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.