By Topic

Evaluation of model-based scatter correction accuracy using Monte Carlo calculated phantom inputs

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
S. D. Wollenweber ; GE Med. Syst., Milwaukee, WI, USA ; S. G. Kohlmyer ; T. K. Lewellen

3D scatter correction remains one of the leading challenges to clinical implementation of 3D PET. The Ollinger model-based 3D scatter correction method for PET was evaluated using Monte Carlo calculated input (single and multiple scatter) for two phantom configurations, a uniform 20 cm diameter cylinder, and an 8-box phantom (10 cm squares) with four radioactive, two air and two water compartments. GE PET AdvanceTM 3D geometry was used. Phantoms were specified as contained within the field-of-view axially, within plus extending out 1 FOV axially on one side and within plus out 1 FOV on both sides. Ideal attenuation maps were used as generated from the simulation program. Simulation output was used as scatter correction input for trues+single-scatter and trues+total scatter. Parameters investigated for the scatter correction algorithm included: tail-scaling versus no tail-scaling (nulling error outside the object transaxially); 3 versus 5 iterations of the algorithm; inclusion versus exclusion of multiple-scatter and inclusion versus exclusion of extended axial FOV data (for extended phantoms). The 3 iteration scatter correction accuracy was not significantly different from that found with 5 iterations; single-scatter estimation is within 8% cif known Input for the 20 cm cylinder and within 20% with the 8-box phantom; when multiple scatter is included the correction accuracy 30% of an at-worst 120% correction. Further investigation of downsampling, the multiple-scatter model parameters, inclusion of extension data and the net effect of the correction on lesion detectability remains

Published in:

Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2000 IEEE  (Volume:2 )

Date of Conference:

2000