Lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO)-or lutetium-yttrium oxyorthosilicate (LYSO)-based PET scanners have intrinsic radioactivity in the scintillator crystals due to the presence of 176 Lu, which decays by b-emission followed by one or more prompt g-ray emissions. This leads to intrinsic true counts that can influence the image when scanning low levels of activity. An evaluation of the effects of this intrinsic activity for low levels of activity and different energy windows is performed on an LSO-based small-animal PET scanner. Methods: Intrinsic count rate and sensitivity were measured for a range of lower-level discriminators (LLDs) ranging from 100 to 750 keV. The noise equivalent count rate (NECR) as a function of LLD for activity levels from 100 Bq to 100 kBq was estimated using a combination of measurement and previously published data for this scanner. Phantom imaging was performed using three 68 Ge sources of strength 55, 220, and 940 Bq and LLD levels of 250, 350, and 400 keV. The images were assessed using a contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) analysis and by comparing the observed ratio of source activities to the true ratio value. Results: The intrinsic true count rate is reduced from 940 counts per second (cps) for a 250-to 750-keV energy window to ,2 cps for a 400-to 750-keV window. There is a corresponding 2-fold drop in sensitivity for detected true events for external positron sources for these 2 energy windows. The NECR versus LLD curves showed a highly peaked shape, with the optimum LLD being approximately 425 keV. The phantom image results were dominated by the intrinsic true counts when an energy window of 250-750 keV was used. The intrinsic true counts were almost completely removed by raising the LLD to 400 keV. The CNR for each of the sources was higher for the narrow energy window and the 55 Bq could be easily visualized in images acquired with LLD levels of 350 and 400 keV but not when the 250-keV LLD was used. Images acquired with an LLD of 400 keV and reconstructed with 2-dimensional filtered backprojection were the most quantitatively accurate. Conclusion: It is possible to visualize sources of ,1 kBq in LSO-based animal PET systems by raising the LLD to 400 keV to exclude the majority of the counts due to the intrinsic activity present in the LSO. PET scanner performance is usually optimized for a specific imaging task based on the results of noise equivalent count rate (NECR) measurements (1-4). The usual measure reported is the peak NECR value and the activity at which the peak occurs and, in general, the energy window is chosen to maximize the value of the peak NECR. When the imaging task involves very low levels of injected activity, such as cell trafficking studies (5) or gene expression imaging (6), the scanner is operating at a count rate far less than the peak NECR value.When low activity levels are being imaged, there is a very limited number of true counts that can be acquired so that one would consider using a wider energy window to increase the sensitivity (7). However, the choice...

The MicroPET R4 scanner was designed for imaging small rodents such as mice and rats. In many cases the spatial resolution of this system is not sufficient for resolving structures of interest. In order to improve the spatial resolution of the MicroPET R4 through improved spatial sampling, the authors have implemented a variable radius eccentric motion, commonly referred to as wobbling, which is applied to the animal bed during scanning. The wobble motion is incorporated into the sinograms using modified histogramming software, capable of reading the bed wobble position from the list-mode data. The histogramming software corrects the data for the dwell time, apparent crystal location, and crystal-pair efficiency and applies a resolution matching filter. The data acquisition, reconstruction, and image display programs provided from the manufacturer required no modifications. For all studies a wobble period of 8 s was used. The optimal wobble radius was found to be 1.50 mm. The wobbled bed acquisition technique was tested by scanning a resolution phantom and a rat. Images from both studies acquired when using the wobble motion showed an improved spatial resolution when compared with comparable images acquired without the wobble motion. The bed wobbling mechanism can be added to any MicroPET system without major changes and without compromising any imaging modes. Implementing the wobble mechanism may represent a cost-effective method to upgrade the spatial resolution of a MicroPET when compared to the purchase of a newer generation system.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract