Accurate Monte Carlo modeling and performance assessment of the X-PET subsystem of the FLEX triumph preclinical PET/CT scanner.

PURPOSE X-PET is a commercial small animal PET scanner incorporating several innovative designs to achieve improved performance. It is employed as a PET subsystem in the FLEX Triumph preclinical PET/CT scanner, the first commercial small animal PET/CT scanner worldwide. The authors report on a novel Monte Carlo (MC) model designed for the evaluation of performance parameters of the X-PET METHODS: The Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission (GATE) MC code was used as a simulation tool. The authors implemented more accurate modeling of the geometry of detector blocks and associated electronic chains, including dead-time and time-independent parameters, compared to previously presented MC models of the X-PET scanner. Validation of the MC model involved comparison between simulated and measured performance parameters of the X-PET, including spatial resolution, sensitivity, and noise equivalent count rate (NECR). Thereafter, various simulations were performed to assess scanner performance parameters according to NEMA NU 4-2008 standards with the aim to present a reliable Monte Carlo platform for small animal PET scanner design optimization. RESULTS The average differences between simulated and measured results were 11.2%, 33.3%, and 9.1% for spatial resolution, sensitivity, and NECR, respectively. The average system absolute sensitivity was 2.7%. Furthermore, the peak true count rate, peak NECR, and scatter fraction were 2050 kcps, 1520 kcps, and 4.7%, respectively, for a mouse phantom and 1017 kcps, 469 kcps, and 18.2%, respectively, for a rat phantom. Spatial resolution was also measured in ten different positions at two axial locations. The radial, tangential, and axial FWHM ranged from 1.31 to 1.96 mm, 1.17 to 2.11 mm, and 1.77 to 2.44 mm, respectively, as the radial position varied from 0 to 25 mm at the centre of the axial field-of-view. CONCLUSIONS The developed MC simulation platform provides a reliable tool for performance evaluation of small animal PET scanners and has the potential to be used in other applications such as detector design optimization, correction of image degrading factors such as randoms, scatter, intercrystal scatter, parallax error, and partial volume effect.

[1]  Qinan Bao,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the Inveon Dedicated PET Preclinical Tomograph Based on the NEMA NU-4 Standards , 2009, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[2]  Habib Zaidi,et al.  Current Trends in Preclinical PET System Design. , 2007, PET clinics.

[3]  Hongdi Li,et al.  GATE Monte Carlo Simulation of a High-Sensitivity and High-Resolution LSO-Based Small Animal PET Camera , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[4]  A Rodríguez-Ruano,et al.  Design and performance evaluation of a coplanar multimodality scanner for rodent imaging. , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[5]  H. Baghaei,et al.  An efficient detector production method for position-sensitive scintillation detector arrays with 98% detector packing fraction , 2002 .

[6]  Hongdi Li,et al.  Design of an inexpensive high-sensitivity rodent-research PET camera (RRPET) , 2003, 2003 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37515).

[7]  H. Zaidi,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the FLEX Triumph X-PET Scanner Using the National Electrical Manufacturers Association NU-4 Standards , 2010, The Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[8]  T J Spinks,et al.  The design and physical characteristics of a small animal positron emission tomograph. , 1995, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  C Lartizien,et al.  GATE: a simulation toolkit for PET and SPECT. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  M. Daube-Witherspoon,et al.  Treatment of axial data in three-dimensional PET. , 1987, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[11]  Yu Wang,et al.  A new pileup-prevention front-end electronic design for high-resolution PET and gamma cameras , 2001 .

[12]  H. Baghaei,et al.  Performance evaluation of the low-cost high-sensitivity rodent research PET (RRPET) camera using Monte Carlo simulations , 2005, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2005.

[13]  H Zaidi,et al.  Relevance of accurate Monte Carlo modeling in nuclear medical imaging. , 1999, Medical physics.

[14]  Jinyi Qi,et al.  Iterative image reconstruction for positron emission tomography based on a detector response function estimated from point source measurements , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  Wai-Hoi Wong,et al.  A positron camera detector design with cross-coupled scintillators and quadrant sharing photomultipliers , 1992 .

[16]  D. Pareto,et al.  Comparison of NEMA NU 4-2008 vs NEMA NU 2-2001 for the performance evaluation of the microPET R4 system , 2009, 2009 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC).

[18]  John Ashburner,et al.  Dynamic monitoring of [11C]diprenorphine in rat brain using a prototype positron imaging device , 1991, Journal of Neuroscience Methods.

[19]  T. Bukki,et al.  Performance test of the MiniPET-II small animal scanner according to the NEMA NU-4 standard , 2009, 2009 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC).

[20]  M. Desco,et al.  VrPET/CT: Development of a rotating multimodality scanner for small-animal imaging , 2008, 2008 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[21]  John D. Cressler,et al.  Proton radiation effects in 0.35 /spl mu/m partially depleted SOI MOSFETs fabricated on UNIBOND , 2002 .

[22]  E. Anashkin,et al.  Performance Evaluation of a PEM Scanner Using the NEMA NU 4—2008 Small Animal PET Standards , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science.

[23]  Edward Anashkin,et al.  First test results of a commercially available clinical PET scanner using the NEMA NU 4 - 2008 small animal PET standards , 2008, 2008 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.