Scattered radiation effects on the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency of gamma camera

Wael M Elshemey1, Mohamed A Ghonem1, Mahmoud H Khidr2

1 2

Biophysics Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Egypt.

Abstract An evaluation of the effect of scattered radiation on the performance of gamma camera is carried out using a specially designed home-made homogenous circular planar flood source filled with 5.30.3 mCi of Tc-99m solution as a scattering medium. The scatter effects are assessed by analyzing the energy spectrum of Tc-99m for the scatter fraction and calculating two important gamma camera operational parameters; extrinsic counting efficiency and sensitivity for five different flood source thicknesses (1.2, 5, 10, 15 & 20cm) and three different source-to-detector distances (70, 90 & 110cm). Results show apparent increase in the scatter fraction with source thickness (from 0.46 up to 0.70). This is accompanied by a decrease in the fraction of photopeak to total area of the energy spectra (from 0.54 down to 0.30). The increase in source thickness is associated with a decrease in the extrinsic sensitivity (from 3.28 down to 1.34 Kcts/sec-mCi). This is associated with a decrease in counting efficiency as well (from 3.78 down to 1.55%). With the increase in source-to-detector distance, the extrinsic sensitivity decreases (from 3.28 to 3.21 Kcts/sec-mCi) while the counting efficiency increases (from 3.78 to 11.66%). The analysis of data shows that a source-to-detector distance of 95.590.92cm is a good compromise for an acceptable extrinsic sensitivity and a reasonable counting efficiency. This result would be valuable for an optimized evaluation of gamma camera counting performance. Key words: scattered fraction, gamma camera, extrinsic counting efficiency, extrinsic sensitivity, solid angle

1.

Introduction

Gamma camera is commonly used in nuclear medicine imaging. The acquired image contains not only primary photons but also photons scattered within the body. Several workers have demonstrated the effects of scattered photons on nuclear imaging for planar (Nguyen et al., 2011; Hugo W A M de Jong et al., 1999; Kojima A et al., 1991) and photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging (Deloar et al., 2003; Floyd et al., 1988) through experimental and Monte Carlo studies. Since scattered photons give false positional information, the acquired image is degraded and accurate quantification of radioactivity in the body is inhibited. Several methods have been proposed to correct for scattered radiation effects using Monte Carlo simulation and experimental measurements (Sadrmomtaz and Noori, 2011; Holstensson et al. 2007; Kojima et al., 2004; Gustafsson et al., 2000). Scattered photons would also affect image quality and some quality assurance (QA) programs recommended by several international standards such as uniformity, non uniformity, contrast, spatial resolution (Holstensson et al. 2010; Deloar et al., 2003; Kojima et al., 1992; King et al., 1991). Among the most important QA parameters used to evaluate the counting performance of gamma camera are the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency (IPSM, 1992; NEMA, 1994). Although several studies have measured the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency for some source-to-gamma camera geometries (Early et al., 1995) , an extensive study on the effect of scattered radiation (which is a major factor affecting image quality in real situation) on any of these two parameters is hardly found (Rodrigues and Galiano, 2007). The extrinsic sensitivity of a gamma-camera can be defined as the number of total counts collected by the system within the photopeak window as a function of the activity of the source, and is usually expressed in counts per minute per mCi or counts per second per MBq (IPSM, 1992; NEMA, 1994). This quantity depends primarily on the crystal/photomultiplier characteristics, design and performance. It also depends on the energy spectrum and on the collimator transmission for a considered energy. It may represent a useful indicator of the overall performance of a Gamma-camera (Santos et al., 2008; Olcott et al., 2007; Elkamhawy et al., 2000). Several methods have been proposed for the measurement of the extrinsic sensitivity, involving either point or large sources and a small or large distance between the source and the collimator (Rodrigues and Galiano, 2007). The counting efficiency is defined as the number of counts recorded by the detector in certain time interval, divided by the number of counts that theoretically strike the detector surface in that same time interval, with a collimator in place (Rodrigues and Galiano, 2007). One important parameter that has to be estimated in order to calculate the extrinsic counting efficiency of gamma camera is the solid angle subtended by the source on the detector. Several studies have discussed the calculation of solid angle for different source to detector geometries (Tsoulfanidis, 1983; knoll, 2000; Galliano and Rodrigues, 2004). In the present work, the extrinsic 2

counting efficiency is calculated for the first time for a unique geometry employing a circular source and a gamma camera with a rectangular detector. The solid angle subtended by the circular source on the rectangular detector is calculated using an equation provided by Tsoulfanidis, 1983. The effect of scattered gamma radiation on the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency is studied at different SDDs (70, 90, and 110cm) and source thicknesses (1.2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 cm). 2.
Equipment

Materials and Methods

A gamma camera (Symbia, Siemens, Germany) with a low-energy, parallel hole, general purpose collimator is used in this work. Energy signal summed up all 59 photomultiplier tube signals of the gamma camera. The scintillator thickness is 0.99 cm. The energy spectrum is obtained in 1keV/channel and the energy resolution is 9.9% at 140keV. The average dead time was 1.25 sec.
Phantom description

An acrylic cylindrical phantom is constructed providing cylindrical distribution of Tc-99m with a diameter of 32cm, a height of 25cm and a thickness of 0.25cm. The phantom is provided with a vertical scale in order to adjust the level (H) of source solution.
Source preparation

The phantom is first filled with water up to1.2cm height in order to simulate the case of a flood phantom. This layer is injected with 5.30.3 mCi of Tc-99m. The solution is stirred using a glass rod to ensure a homogenous distribution of the Tc-99m. The energy spectrum is then acquired and the collected data saved for further analysis and calculations. The same steps are repeated for different source levels (5, 10, 15 & 20cm). All data are corrected for the time decay of Tc-99m.
Analysis of energy spectra

Only one head (facing the ceiling) of the dual-head detectors of gamma camera is used in the acquisition of the energy spectrum. From the energy spectrum one can calculate the scattered fraction. First, the total number of counts as a function of layer thickness T(H) is calculated using 1(Kojima et al 1991): T ( H ) = S ( H ) + D( H ) (1) equation

Where S(H) is the total number of counts for scattered photons (from zero up to 131keV) and D(H) is the total number of counts for non-scattered photons (from 131keV up to 150keV).

The scattered fraction is defined as the ratio of scattered to non-scattered counts as in equation 2 (Kojima et al 1991):

SF =

S( H ) D( H )

(2)

Measurement of extrinsic sensitivity

First, the detector face is rotated such that it is facing the floor. For each source thickness (H), the phantom is placed opposite to the center of the Useful Field Of View (UFOV) of the detector at three different source-to-detector distances (70, 90 and 110cm) from the collimator face. The acquisition time is 1min at 15% energy window. After the acquisition, the number of count is determined. The extrinsic sensitivity S is defined as the count rate per unit source activity at a certain distance (Santos et al 2008). It is calculated for different source thicknesses (1.2, 5, 10, 15 & 20cm) using equation 3 (Rodrigues and Galiano, 2007):

S=

N At

(3)

Where, N is the number of counts recorded by the detector in a certain time interval t and A is the activity of the source.
Measurement of extrinsic counting efficiency

The extrinsic counting efficiency directly depends on the solid angle subtended by the circular source on the rectangular detector. According to Tsoulfanidis, 1983, the solid angle () of a source facing the corner of a rectangle detector is given by (equation 4):
=

35 4 2 7 7 5 2 4 2 2 2 6 ( +2 ) 2 (94 + 92 +10 22 ) 22 (2 +2 ) (6 +2 ) 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 32 16 16

12 3 1 1 5 35 5 4 [1 2 (2 +2 ) + (5 4 + 34 + 32 ) + 2 (2 +2 ) 6 + 22 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 4 4 2 8 4 64 12

(4)

Where

= a d , 2 = b d , = Rs d , (a) is the length of rectangle, (b) is the width of 1

rectangle, (Rs) is the source diameter and d is the source to detector distance. Since the source used in this work is placed at the center of the rectangular detector, the calculation of the solid angle is carried out by dividing the rectangular detector into four equal smaller rectangles, where the source is facing each smaller rectangle at the corner (mid-point between the four rectangles) and thus the solid angle is equal to the sum of solid angles calculated for each of the smaller rectangles (figure 1).

Source

d 1

The extrinsic counting efficiency () is defined as the number of counts N recorded by the detector in 4 certain time interval t, divided by the number of counts Nth that theoretically strike the detectors
Figure 1 surface in that same time interval, with a collimator in place. To determine , the geometric efficiency 3

G is defined as G = 4

(Rodrigues and Galiano, 2007). Knowing the source activity (A =

5.3mCi0.3%), half-life time (6.02hr) (H E Mostafa et al. 2011) and gamma photon emission probability (F=89%), the extrinsic counting efficiency for 140 keV photons for a distributed source is given by equation (5) (Attila vertes, Sandor Nagy:

N N . 4 = N th . F . At

(5)

3. Result and discussion

The energy spectra obtained with all source thickness levels of scattered material (water) are shown in fig.1. The data show that scattered photons occurs below approximately 130 keV, while the photopeak is identical in both energy spectra. Fig.1 shows the energy spectra for increasing the scattering material (source) thickness ranging from 1.2 up to 20cm though 5, 10 and 15cm.

35000
H=1.2cm

30000 25000
Count

H=5cm H=10cm H=15cm H=20cm

20000 15000 10000 5000 0 20 40 60 80 100 Energy (keV) 120 140

160

180

as the scattered material thickness increases the maximum value for the photopeak moves to lower energy because of increasing inclusion of scattered photons within the photopeak, Also, below 130keV great increasing of (.) accords to increasing the source thicknesses. The photopeak fraction and the scatter fraction plotted against the source thicknesses are shown in fig.2 the photopeak fraction decreases with increasing of source thicknesses at the same activity, While, the scatter fraction is increases with increasing the source thicknesses.

0.8 0.7
Photopeak / total area

photopeak fraction scattered fraction

0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

Scattered photons / total area

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25

Flood source thickness[cm ]

From table1 flood source thickness (H) increases from 1.2cm through 5, 10, 15 and then 20cm. as well as the source to detector distance from 70cm through 90 up to 110cm. the acquisition time is 1minute and the activity is corrected for time decay from elapsed time after injection according to equation(6) (ref).

A = A e t

( 6)

The solid angle is noticed that it decrease from 0.0331 to 0.0221 and then .0105 steradian with increasing the SDD from 70 to 90 up to 110 cm respectively. The count
6

rate is varies due to changing the corrected activity. When injected activity is varies with time the count rate is varies as well because the count rate is a function in activity. The count rate is varies inversely with SDD. Therefore, the extrinsic sensitivity is decrease with decreasing count rate. ). The increase in source thickness (H) is associated with a decrease in the extrinsic sensitivity (from 3.28 down to 1.34 Kcts/sec-mCi, from 3.24 down to 1.33 Kcts/sec-mCi and 3.21 down to 1.32 Kcts/secmCi for 70, 90 and 110cm respectively from the source to-detector distance. The uncertainity in extrinsic sensitivity is ------, ------and------ Kcts/sec-mCi respectively this result is shown in table (2) and graphical curve is shown in Figure (2).

3500
Extrinsic Sensitivity[Count/(sec.mCi)]

At S-D distance=70cm At S-D distance=90cm At S-D distance=110cm

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000 0 5
Flood Source thicknesses [cm]

10

15

20

25

Figure (2) the sensitivity calculated using a flood source of different thicknesses (H) for three different source to- detector distances (SDD).

Fig.2 shows that the extrinsic sensitivity is decrease when the flood source thickness increase due to the limited energy resolution which prevents the Tc-99m scattered photons from counting. From equation (3) the sensitivity also decrease when the SDD
7

decrease. As the solid angle decreases with increasing of SDD so, the theoretical number of photons that enter the detector aperture decreases. Therefore the true number of photons which counted also decreases. Table (2) shows the increasing in source thicknesses (H) is associated with a decreasing in extrinsic counting efficiency from 3.9 down to1.6% ,5.6 down to2.3% and 11.7 down to 4.8% for 70,90 and110cm of the source -to- detector distance SDD respectively. Figure (3) shows that the extrinsic efficiency is decreases with increasing the source thicknesses (H). While the efficiency increases with increasing the SDD.

14

At D=70cm At D=90cm At D=110cm

12

Extrinsic efficiency[%]

10

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Flood source thickness [cm]

Figure (3) the counting efficiency calculated using a flood source of different thicknesses (H) for three different source to- detector distances (SDD)

The uncertainty of the counting efficiency is 4.2, 3.4, 2.4, 2 and3.4% for1.2, 5, 10, 15, and 20cm of (H) respectively with the three different SDD. The uncertainty of the counting efficiency is 2.8E-3, 6.4 E-3 and .01% for 70, 90, and 110cm of SDD respectively with the five different source thicknesses (H). From collected and measured data with increasing the source-to-detector distance the sensitivity is decreases while the efficiency is increases. Figure (4) shows the source-to-detector of 95.590.92 is a good comprise for an acceptable extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency.
(A)
3290 Sensitivity Efficiency 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 120

(B) Extrinsic sensitivity [counts/sec.mCi]

2840 2830 2820 2810 2800 2790 2780 2770 2760 60 70 80 90 100 110 2 8 12

Extrinsic sensitivity [counts/sec.mCi]

10

3260 3250 3240 3230 3220 3210 3200 60 70 80 90 100 110 Source to de te ctor distance [cm]

Extrinsic efficiency[ %]

3270

0 120

Source to detector distance[cm]

(C)
2200 9 8

(D)

Extrinsic sensitivity [counts/sec.mCi]

sensitivity Efficiency

1650 1645 1640 1635 1630 1625 1620 1615 1610 60 70 80 90 100 Source to detector distance[cm] 110

Sensitivity Efficiency

7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Extrinsic sensitivity [counts/sec.mCi]

2180 2170 2160 2150 2140 2130 60 70 80 90 100 110 Source to de tector distance [cm]

6 5 4 3 2 1 0 120

Extrinsic efficiency [%]

0 120

(E) 1350 Extrinsic sensitivity [counts/sec.mCi] 1345 1340 1335 1330 1325 1320 1315 1310 60 70 80 90 100 110 Source to detector distance[cm] 1 0 120 4 3 2
Sensitivity Efficiency

6 5

Extrinsic efficiency[%]

Extrinsic efficiency [%]

2190

Extrinsic Efficiency[%]

3280

Sensitivity Efficiency

Figure (4A, B, C, D and E) optimum source to detector distance [cm] based on extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency for source thickness, H=1.2, 5, 10, 15, and 20cm

4. Conclusions

An evaluation of the effect of scattered radiation (photons) analysis and it's effects on the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency of the medical gamma camera with a circular source subtended a rectangular detector has been demonstrated. The result showed that with increasing the flood source thickness the scattered fraction is increases. But, extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency is decreases as the decreasing of the count rate. The extrinsic sensitivity follows a general inverse square relationship with respect to source-to-detector distance. However the extrinsic counting efficiency increases with increasing the source-to-detector distance. The result shows that the good distance comprise for calculating the sensitivity and counting efficiency is 95.590.92cm subtended from the detector face. 5. Reference
Kojima A., Matsumoto M., Takahashi M., 1991.Experimental analysis of scattered photons in Tc-99m imaging with a gamma camera. Ann. Nucl. Med. 5, 139-144. Nguyen M. K, Truong T.T.,Morvidone M, Zaidi H., 2011.Scattered radiation emission imaging: principle and applications. International jornal of biomedical imaging .. Hugo W A de jong, Freek j Beekman, Micheal Ljungberg and Peter P van Rijk. , 1999. The influence of backscatter material on 99 mTc and 201TI line source resonses. Phy. Med. Biol. 44, 665-679. Deloar Hossain M, Watabe Hiroshi, Aoi Toshiyuki and Iida Hidehiro, 2003 Evaluation of penetration and scattering components in conventional pinhole SPECT: Phantom studies using Monte Carlo simulation. Phy. Med. Biol.48, 995-1008. Floyd Carey E., Jaszczak Ronald J., Coleman R. Edward, 1988. Scatter detection in SPECT imaging: dependence on source depth, energy, and energy window. Phy. Med. Biol. 33, 1075-1081. Sadrmomtaz A., Asl Noori M., 2011 Reliability of scatter correction method in SPECT by sitting two energy windows. World applied programming, 1, 143-149.

10

Holstensson Maria, Hindorf Cecilia, Ljungberg Michael, Partridge Mike, Flux Glenn D., 2007. Optimization of energy- window setting for scatter correction in quantitative 111 In Imaging: comparison of measurements and Monte Carlo simulation.Cancer Biotherapy &Radiopharmatheutical. 1,136-142 Kojima A., Matsumoto M., Tomiguchi Seiji, Katsuda Noboru, Yamashita Yasuyuki, Motomura Nobutoku, 2004. Accurate scatter correction for transmission computed tomography using an uncollimated line array source. Ann. Nucl. Med. 18, 45-50 Gustafsson Agnetha, A rlig sa, Jacobsson Lars, Ljungberg Michael, Wikkelso Carsten, 2000. Dualwindow scatter correction and energy window setting in cerebral blood flow SPECT: a Monte Carlo study. Phy. Med. Biol.45, 3431 -3440. Holstensson Maria, Partridge Mike, Buckley Susan E, Flux Glenn D, 2010. The effect of energy and source location on gamma camera intrinsic and extrinsic spatial resolution: an experimental and Monte Carlo study. Phy. Med. Biol.55, 1735-1751. Kojima A., Tsuji Akinori, Takaki Yoshikazu, Tomiguchi Seiji, Hara Masafumi, Matsumoto M., Takahashi Mutsumasa, 1992.Correction of scattered photons in Tc-99m imaging by means of a photopeak dual-energy window acquisition. Ann. Nucl. Med. 6, 153-158. King M A, Hademenos G J, Glick S J, 1991.A dual photopeak window method for scatter correction, the jounal of nuclear medicine. 33, 605-612. Early, P.J., Bruce, D., Sodee, M.D., 1995.Principles and Practice of Medicine, second ed. C.V. Mosby.Nuclear NU 1-1994, 1994.NEMA. Report 66, 1992. IPSM. Rodrigues M., Galiano E., 2007.Experimental determination of the extrinsic sensitivity and counting efficiency of a nuclear gamma camera using a homogeneous circular planar source. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 65, 114 119. Santos J.A.M., Sarmento S., Alves P., Torres M.C., Bastos A. L., Ponte F, 2008 Single-acquisition method for simultaneous determination of extrinsic gamma-camera sensitivity and spatial resolution. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 66, 44-49.

Olcott Peter D., Habte Frezghie, Foudray Angela M., Levin Craig S, 2007. Performance Characterization of a Miniature,High Sensitivity Gamma Ray Camera. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 54, 1492-1497. Elkamhawy Abdelhamid A., Rothenbach Joseph R., Damaraju Srikanth, Badruddin Shamim M., 2000.Intrinsic Uniformity and Relative Sensitivity Quality Control Tests for Single-HeadGamma Cameras. J Nucl Med Technol. 28, 252256.

11

Tsoulfanidis, N., 1983.The defined solid angle method. In: Measurement and Detection of Radiation, Hemisphere Publishers Inc. third ed. pp. 268-276 Knoll, G.F., 2000. Radiation Detection and Measurement, third ed. Wiley, New York, pp. 116118 Aguiar Julio C., Galiano Eduardo, 2004. Theoretical estimates of the solid angle subtended by a dual diaphragmdetector assembly for alpha sources. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 61, 1349-1351. .

Mostafa H. E., Ayoub H. A., Magraby Sh., 2011.Factors affecting the resolution of SPECT Imaging. Journal of American Science, 7, 584-590.

Vrtes Attila, Nagy Sndor, Klencsr Zoltn., (

). Handbook of nuclear chemistry,pp.

12