Loading…

Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled

A PET detector featuring a pseudo-monolithic crystal is being developed as a more cost-effective alternative to a full monolithic crystal PET detector. This work evaluates different methods to localize the scintillation events in quartered monolithic crystals that are optically coupled. A semi-monol...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Physics in medicine & biology 2016-11, Vol.61 (23), p.8298-8320
Main Authors: Morrocchi, M, Hunter, W C J, Del Guerra, A, Lewellen, T K, Kinahan, P E, MacDonald, L R, Bisogni, M G, Miyaoka, R S
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3
container_end_page 8320
container_issue 23
container_start_page 8298
container_title Physics in medicine & biology
container_volume 61
creator Morrocchi, M
Hunter, W C J
Del Guerra, A
Lewellen, T K
Kinahan, P E
MacDonald, L R
Bisogni, M G
Miyaoka, R S
description A PET detector featuring a pseudo-monolithic crystal is being developed as a more cost-effective alternative to a full monolithic crystal PET detector. This work evaluates different methods to localize the scintillation events in quartered monolithic crystals that are optically coupled. A semi-monolithic crystal assembly was formed using four 26  ×  26  ×  10 mm3 LYSO crystals optically coupled together using optical adhesive, to mimic a 52  ×  52  ×  10 mm3 monolithic crystal detector. The crystal assembly was coupled to a 64-channel multi-anode photomultiplier tube using silicon grease. The detector was calibrated using a 34  ×  34 scan grid. Events were first filtered and depth separated using a multi-Lorentzian fit to the collected light distribution. Next, three different techniques were explored to generate the look up tables for the event positioning. The first technique was 'standard interpolation' across the interface. The second technique was 'central extrapolation', where a bin was placed at the midpoint of the interface and events positioned within the interface region were discarded. The third technique used a 'central overlap' method where an extended region was extrapolated at each interface. Events were then positioned using least-squares minimization and maximum likelihood methods. The least-squares minimization applied to the look up table generated with the standard interpolation technique had the best full width at half maximum (FWHM) intrinsic spatial resolution and the lowest bias. However, there were discontinuities in the event positioning that would most likely lead to artifacts in the reconstructed image. The central extrapolation technique also had discontinuities and a 30% sensitivity loss near the crystal-crystal interfaces. The central overlap technique had slightly degraded performance metrics, but it still provided ~2.1 mm intrinsic spatial resolution at the crystal-crystal interface and had a symmetric and continuously varying response function. Results using maximum likelihood positioning were similar to least-squares minimization for the central overlap data.
doi_str_mv 10.1088/0031-9155/61/23/8298
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_27811385</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1836730368</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVJabZpv0EIOoVe3NVYljy-BEJI_0Cgl_ZYhCzLXQXZciR5Yb99vNl0SaD0JEb6zRvNe4ScA_sMDHHNGIeiASHWEtYlX2PZ4BuyAi6hkEKyE7I6IqfkfUr3jAFgWb0jp2WNABzFivy-3Wo_6-zCSENP7daOmU4huaebaE0YU46zeSrdSIcwBu_yxhlq4i5l7RPNG52pjpaGKTujvd9RE-bJ2-4DedsvhP34fJ6RX19uf958K-5-fP1-c31XmApZLqyubCP6WljTcQFt3WsBiA1naCsJHWcdx6ZtQKPoWY21RiNaCbU1leag-Rm5OuhOczvYzixLRO3VFN2g404F7dTrl9Ft1J-wVQJ4iaJZBD49C8TwMNuU1eCSsd7r0YY5KUAua864xAWtDqiJIaVo--MYYGqfjNrbrva2Kwmq5GqfzNJ28fKLx6a_USzA5QFwYVL3YY7j4piahvaFipq6fgHZP8D_Dn8EktKntg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1836730368</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled</title><source>Institute of Physics</source><creator>Morrocchi, M ; Hunter, W C J ; Del Guerra, A ; Lewellen, T K ; Kinahan, P E ; MacDonald, L R ; Bisogni, M G ; Miyaoka, R S</creator><creatorcontrib>Morrocchi, M ; Hunter, W C J ; Del Guerra, A ; Lewellen, T K ; Kinahan, P E ; MacDonald, L R ; Bisogni, M G ; Miyaoka, R S</creatorcontrib><description>A PET detector featuring a pseudo-monolithic crystal is being developed as a more cost-effective alternative to a full monolithic crystal PET detector. This work evaluates different methods to localize the scintillation events in quartered monolithic crystals that are optically coupled. A semi-monolithic crystal assembly was formed using four 26  ×  26  ×  10 mm3 LYSO crystals optically coupled together using optical adhesive, to mimic a 52  ×  52  ×  10 mm3 monolithic crystal detector. The crystal assembly was coupled to a 64-channel multi-anode photomultiplier tube using silicon grease. The detector was calibrated using a 34  ×  34 scan grid. Events were first filtered and depth separated using a multi-Lorentzian fit to the collected light distribution. Next, three different techniques were explored to generate the look up tables for the event positioning. The first technique was 'standard interpolation' across the interface. The second technique was 'central extrapolation', where a bin was placed at the midpoint of the interface and events positioned within the interface region were discarded. The third technique used a 'central overlap' method where an extended region was extrapolated at each interface. Events were then positioned using least-squares minimization and maximum likelihood methods. The least-squares minimization applied to the look up table generated with the standard interpolation technique had the best full width at half maximum (FWHM) intrinsic spatial resolution and the lowest bias. However, there were discontinuities in the event positioning that would most likely lead to artifacts in the reconstructed image. The central extrapolation technique also had discontinuities and a 30% sensitivity loss near the crystal-crystal interfaces. The central overlap technique had slightly degraded performance metrics, but it still provided ~2.1 mm intrinsic spatial resolution at the crystal-crystal interface and had a symmetric and continuously varying response function. Results using maximum likelihood positioning were similar to least-squares minimization for the central overlap data.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0031-9155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1361-6560</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/61/23/8298</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27811385</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PHMBA7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: IOP Publishing</publisher><subject>boundaries ; Calibration ; Humans ; light sharing ; monolithic scintillator ; Optics and Photonics ; Positron-Emission Tomography - instrumentation ; Positron-Emission Tomography - methods ; Scintillation Counting - instrumentation ; Silicon - chemistry ; statistical event positioning ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Physics in medicine &amp; biology, 2016-11, Vol.61 (23), p.8298-8320</ispartof><rights>2016 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27811385$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Morrocchi, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hunter, W C J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Guerra, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewellen, T K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinahan, P E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacDonald, L R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bisogni, M G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miyaoka, R S</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled</title><title>Physics in medicine &amp; biology</title><addtitle>PMB</addtitle><addtitle>Phys. Med. Biol</addtitle><description>A PET detector featuring a pseudo-monolithic crystal is being developed as a more cost-effective alternative to a full monolithic crystal PET detector. This work evaluates different methods to localize the scintillation events in quartered monolithic crystals that are optically coupled. A semi-monolithic crystal assembly was formed using four 26  ×  26  ×  10 mm3 LYSO crystals optically coupled together using optical adhesive, to mimic a 52  ×  52  ×  10 mm3 monolithic crystal detector. The crystal assembly was coupled to a 64-channel multi-anode photomultiplier tube using silicon grease. The detector was calibrated using a 34  ×  34 scan grid. Events were first filtered and depth separated using a multi-Lorentzian fit to the collected light distribution. Next, three different techniques were explored to generate the look up tables for the event positioning. The first technique was 'standard interpolation' across the interface. The second technique was 'central extrapolation', where a bin was placed at the midpoint of the interface and events positioned within the interface region were discarded. The third technique used a 'central overlap' method where an extended region was extrapolated at each interface. Events were then positioned using least-squares minimization and maximum likelihood methods. The least-squares minimization applied to the look up table generated with the standard interpolation technique had the best full width at half maximum (FWHM) intrinsic spatial resolution and the lowest bias. However, there were discontinuities in the event positioning that would most likely lead to artifacts in the reconstructed image. The central extrapolation technique also had discontinuities and a 30% sensitivity loss near the crystal-crystal interfaces. The central overlap technique had slightly degraded performance metrics, but it still provided ~2.1 mm intrinsic spatial resolution at the crystal-crystal interface and had a symmetric and continuously varying response function. Results using maximum likelihood positioning were similar to least-squares minimization for the central overlap data.</description><subject>boundaries</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>light sharing</subject><subject>monolithic scintillator</subject><subject>Optics and Photonics</subject><subject>Positron-Emission Tomography - instrumentation</subject><subject>Positron-Emission Tomography - methods</subject><subject>Scintillation Counting - instrumentation</subject><subject>Silicon - chemistry</subject><subject>statistical event positioning</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0031-9155</issn><issn>1361-6560</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kU9r3DAQxUVJabZpv0EIOoVe3NVYljy-BEJI_0Cgl_ZYhCzLXQXZciR5Yb99vNl0SaD0JEb6zRvNe4ScA_sMDHHNGIeiASHWEtYlX2PZ4BuyAi6hkEKyE7I6IqfkfUr3jAFgWb0jp2WNABzFivy-3Wo_6-zCSENP7daOmU4huaebaE0YU46zeSrdSIcwBu_yxhlq4i5l7RPNG52pjpaGKTujvd9RE-bJ2-4DedsvhP34fJ6RX19uf958K-5-fP1-c31XmApZLqyubCP6WljTcQFt3WsBiA1naCsJHWcdx6ZtQKPoWY21RiNaCbU1leag-Rm5OuhOczvYzixLRO3VFN2g404F7dTrl9Ft1J-wVQJ4iaJZBD49C8TwMNuU1eCSsd7r0YY5KUAua864xAWtDqiJIaVo--MYYGqfjNrbrva2Kwmq5GqfzNJ28fKLx6a_USzA5QFwYVL3YY7j4piahvaFipq6fgHZP8D_Dn8EktKntg</recordid><startdate>20161103</startdate><enddate>20161103</enddate><creator>Morrocchi, M</creator><creator>Hunter, W C J</creator><creator>Del Guerra, A</creator><creator>Lewellen, T K</creator><creator>Kinahan, P E</creator><creator>MacDonald, L R</creator><creator>Bisogni, M G</creator><creator>Miyaoka, R S</creator><general>IOP Publishing</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161103</creationdate><title>Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled</title><author>Morrocchi, M ; Hunter, W C J ; Del Guerra, A ; Lewellen, T K ; Kinahan, P E ; MacDonald, L R ; Bisogni, M G ; Miyaoka, R S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>boundaries</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>light sharing</topic><topic>monolithic scintillator</topic><topic>Optics and Photonics</topic><topic>Positron-Emission Tomography - instrumentation</topic><topic>Positron-Emission Tomography - methods</topic><topic>Scintillation Counting - instrumentation</topic><topic>Silicon - chemistry</topic><topic>statistical event positioning</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Morrocchi, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hunter, W C J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Del Guerra, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lewellen, T K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kinahan, P E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MacDonald, L R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bisogni, M G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miyaoka, R S</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Physics in medicine &amp; biology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Morrocchi, M</au><au>Hunter, W C J</au><au>Del Guerra, A</au><au>Lewellen, T K</au><au>Kinahan, P E</au><au>MacDonald, L R</au><au>Bisogni, M G</au><au>Miyaoka, R S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled</atitle><jtitle>Physics in medicine &amp; biology</jtitle><stitle>PMB</stitle><addtitle>Phys. Med. Biol</addtitle><date>2016-11-03</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>23</issue><spage>8298</spage><epage>8320</epage><pages>8298-8320</pages><issn>0031-9155</issn><eissn>1361-6560</eissn><coden>PHMBA7</coden><abstract>A PET detector featuring a pseudo-monolithic crystal is being developed as a more cost-effective alternative to a full monolithic crystal PET detector. This work evaluates different methods to localize the scintillation events in quartered monolithic crystals that are optically coupled. A semi-monolithic crystal assembly was formed using four 26  ×  26  ×  10 mm3 LYSO crystals optically coupled together using optical adhesive, to mimic a 52  ×  52  ×  10 mm3 monolithic crystal detector. The crystal assembly was coupled to a 64-channel multi-anode photomultiplier tube using silicon grease. The detector was calibrated using a 34  ×  34 scan grid. Events were first filtered and depth separated using a multi-Lorentzian fit to the collected light distribution. Next, three different techniques were explored to generate the look up tables for the event positioning. The first technique was 'standard interpolation' across the interface. The second technique was 'central extrapolation', where a bin was placed at the midpoint of the interface and events positioned within the interface region were discarded. The third technique used a 'central overlap' method where an extended region was extrapolated at each interface. Events were then positioned using least-squares minimization and maximum likelihood methods. The least-squares minimization applied to the look up table generated with the standard interpolation technique had the best full width at half maximum (FWHM) intrinsic spatial resolution and the lowest bias. However, there were discontinuities in the event positioning that would most likely lead to artifacts in the reconstructed image. The central extrapolation technique also had discontinuities and a 30% sensitivity loss near the crystal-crystal interfaces. The central overlap technique had slightly degraded performance metrics, but it still provided ~2.1 mm intrinsic spatial resolution at the crystal-crystal interface and had a symmetric and continuously varying response function. Results using maximum likelihood positioning were similar to least-squares minimization for the central overlap data.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>IOP Publishing</pub><pmid>27811385</pmid><doi>10.1088/0031-9155/61/23/8298</doi><tpages>23</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0031-9155
ispartof Physics in medicine & biology, 2016-11, Vol.61 (23), p.8298-8320
issn 0031-9155
1361-6560
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmed_primary_27811385
source Institute of Physics
subjects boundaries
Calibration
Humans
light sharing
monolithic scintillator
Optics and Photonics
Positron-Emission Tomography - instrumentation
Positron-Emission Tomography - methods
Scintillation Counting - instrumentation
Silicon - chemistry
statistical event positioning
Time Factors
title Evaluation of event position reconstruction in monolithic crystals that are optically coupled
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T05%3A57%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20event%20position%20reconstruction%20in%20monolithic%20crystals%20that%20are%20optically%20coupled&rft.jtitle=Physics%20in%20medicine%20&%20biology&rft.au=Morrocchi,%20M&rft.date=2016-11-03&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=23&rft.spage=8298&rft.epage=8320&rft.pages=8298-8320&rft.issn=0031-9155&rft.eissn=1361-6560&rft.coden=PHMBA7&rft_id=info:doi/10.1088/0031-9155/61/23/8298&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1836730368%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c480t-ea4e95f75ecd351b7fa51889308e461d30d389b91a85f0787a8c5b617ec4a31a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1836730368&rft_id=info:pmid/27811385&rfr_iscdi=true