Study on High Density Scintillators and Multi-energy Windows for Improving I-131 Gamma Image Quality: Monte Carlo Simulation Approach

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

An energy window with a gamma peak centered at 364 keV (86%) is usually used for I-131 imaging. However, the image performance indexes such as image count, scatter fraction (SF), spatial resolution (SR) obtained using a conventional gamma camera, which uses a 3/8-in sodium iodide scintillator, are poor mainly due to its low detection eciency. In this study, we investigated the feasibility of using a higher energy peak (637 and 723 keV) for the energy window to obtain a better imaging performance compared with the conventional I-131 imaging method. GATE (v7.0), which is based on Monte Carlo method, was used for performing simulations. A clinical gamma camera, SYMBIA-T2 (Siemens), was mounted on a NaI scintillator in the simulation. A GAGG scintillator was also realized for eective detection of high energy gamma, in addition to using high energy (HE) and ultrahigh energy (UHE) collimators. We obtained I-131 planar images through the conventionally used window method (364 keV 10%). The high-energy gamma ray of I 131 (637 and 723 keV) have been additionally used for improving image performance. The scatter correction method was applied to images for suppressing scatter due to high-energy gamma rays.
Various indexes are used for validating image performance such as SR, SF, and contrast-to-noise ratio. High-energy gamma rays could be used to increase the image counts, but the other image performances were degraded compared to the scatter-corrected 364 keV images (SF of 6.33 - 27.73%; SR of 0.93 - 6.02%). The UHE collimator was useful in obtaining a better spatial resolution and suppressing scatter components compared with the HE collimator. However, it did not exhibit a sucient image performance to be considered as a replacement for the HE collimator. In order to use the high-energy gamma rays of I-131 (637 and 723 keV), it is necessary to design a new collimator to control penetration and improve resolution, instead of using a UHE collimator. Furthermore, scatter correction methods also need to be optimized.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 M. S. Kaminski, 96 : 1259-, 2000

2 R. L. Wahl, 30 : 31-, 2003

3 J. G. Rajendran, 49 : 837-, 2008

4 Z. Keidar, 33 : 205-, 2003

5 S. Kohlfuerst, 36 : 886-, 2009

6 Y. K. Dewaraja, 24 : 417-, 2009

7 G. Sgouros, 45 : 1366-, 2004

8 E. Rault, 22 : 423-, 2007

9 T. G. Turkington, 44 : 1262-, 1997

10 D. Autret, 20 : 77-, 2005

11 V. Zilioli, 56 : 551-, 2017

12 A. Cot, 53 : 198-, 2006

13 Y. K. Dewaraja, 41 : 123-, 2000

14 Y. K. Dewaraja, 41 : 1760-, 2000

15 S. Jan, 49 : 4543-, 2004

16 K. Ogawa, 10 : 408-, 1991

17 Y. Dewaraja, 45 : 3109-, 1998

18 G. Delpon, 94 : 1224-, 2002

19 Y. K. Dewaraja, 54 : 2182-, 2013

20 C. Beijst, 57 : 103-, 2016

21 C. A. J. van Gils, 61 : 5166-, 2016

22 S. R. Cherry, "Physics in Nuclear Medicine" Saunders 239-, 2012