Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

Yongfeng Yang, Jinyi Qi, Yibao Wu, Sara St. James, Richard Farrell, Purushottam A. Dokhale, Kanai S. Shah, Simon R Cherry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

47 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many laboratories develop depth-encoding detectors to improve the trade-off between spatial resolution and sensitivity in positron emission tomography (PET) scanners. One challenge in implementing these detectors is the need to calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for the large numbers of detector elements in a scanner. In this work, we evaluate two different methods, a linear detector calibration and a linear crystal calibration, for determining DOI calibration parameters. Both methods can use measurements from any source distribution and location, or even the intrinsic lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) background activity, and are therefore well suited for use in a depth-encoding PET scanner. The methods were evaluated by measuring detector and crystal DOI responses for all eight detectors in a prototype depth-encoding PET scanner. The detectors utilize dual-ended readout of LSO scintillator arrays with position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes (PSAPDs). The LSO arrays have 7 × 7 elements, with a crystal size of 0.92 × 0.92 × 20 mm3 and pitch of 1.0 mm. The arrays are read out by two 8 × 8 mm2 area PSAPDs placed at opposite ends of the arrays. DOI is measured by the ratio of the amplitude of the total energy signals measured by the two PSAPDs. Small variations were observed in the DOI responses of different crystals within an array as well as DOI responses for different arrays. A slightly nonlinear dependence of the DOI ratio on depth was observed and the nonlinearity was larger for the corner and edge crystals. The DOI calibration parameters were obtained from the DOI responses measured in a singles mode. The average error between the calibrated DOI and the known DOI was 0.8 mm if a linear detector DOI calibration was used and 0.5 mm if a linear crystal DOI calibration was used. A line source phantom and a hot rod phantom were scanned on the prototype PET scanner. DOI measurement significantly improved the image spatial resolution no matter which DOI calibration method was used. A linear crystal DOI calibration provided slightly better image spatial resolution compared with a linear detector DOI calibration.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)433-445
Number of pages13
JournalPhysics in Medicine and Biology
Volume54
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 21 2009

Fingerprint

Avalanches
Positron-Emission Tomography
Calibration

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs. / Yang, Yongfeng; Qi, Jinyi; Wu, Yibao; St. James, Sara; Farrell, Richard; Dokhale, Purushottam A.; Shah, Kanai S.; Cherry, Simon R.

In: Physics in Medicine and Biology, Vol. 54, No. 2, 21.01.2009, p. 433-445.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Yang, Yongfeng ; Qi, Jinyi ; Wu, Yibao ; St. James, Sara ; Farrell, Richard ; Dokhale, Purushottam A. ; Shah, Kanai S. ; Cherry, Simon R. / Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs. In: Physics in Medicine and Biology. 2009 ; Vol. 54, No. 2. pp. 433-445.
@article{19dbea13553a4c119e3988f55c38079c,
title = "Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs",
abstract = "Many laboratories develop depth-encoding detectors to improve the trade-off between spatial resolution and sensitivity in positron emission tomography (PET) scanners. One challenge in implementing these detectors is the need to calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for the large numbers of detector elements in a scanner. In this work, we evaluate two different methods, a linear detector calibration and a linear crystal calibration, for determining DOI calibration parameters. Both methods can use measurements from any source distribution and location, or even the intrinsic lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) background activity, and are therefore well suited for use in a depth-encoding PET scanner. The methods were evaluated by measuring detector and crystal DOI responses for all eight detectors in a prototype depth-encoding PET scanner. The detectors utilize dual-ended readout of LSO scintillator arrays with position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes (PSAPDs). The LSO arrays have 7 × 7 elements, with a crystal size of 0.92 × 0.92 × 20 mm3 and pitch of 1.0 mm. The arrays are read out by two 8 × 8 mm2 area PSAPDs placed at opposite ends of the arrays. DOI is measured by the ratio of the amplitude of the total energy signals measured by the two PSAPDs. Small variations were observed in the DOI responses of different crystals within an array as well as DOI responses for different arrays. A slightly nonlinear dependence of the DOI ratio on depth was observed and the nonlinearity was larger for the corner and edge crystals. The DOI calibration parameters were obtained from the DOI responses measured in a singles mode. The average error between the calibrated DOI and the known DOI was 0.8 mm if a linear detector DOI calibration was used and 0.5 mm if a linear crystal DOI calibration was used. A line source phantom and a hot rod phantom were scanned on the prototype PET scanner. DOI measurement significantly improved the image spatial resolution no matter which DOI calibration method was used. A linear crystal DOI calibration provided slightly better image spatial resolution compared with a linear detector DOI calibration.",
author = "Yongfeng Yang and Jinyi Qi and Yibao Wu and {St. James}, Sara and Richard Farrell and Dokhale, {Purushottam A.} and Shah, {Kanai S.} and Cherry, {Simon R}",
year = "2009",
month = "1",
day = "21",
doi = "10.1088/0031-9155/54/2/017",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "54",
pages = "433--445",
journal = "Physics in Medicine and Biology",
issn = "0031-9155",
publisher = "IOP Publishing Ltd.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Depth of interaction calibration for PET detectors with dual-ended readout by PSAPDs

AU - Yang, Yongfeng

AU - Qi, Jinyi

AU - Wu, Yibao

AU - St. James, Sara

AU - Farrell, Richard

AU - Dokhale, Purushottam A.

AU - Shah, Kanai S.

AU - Cherry, Simon R

PY - 2009/1/21

Y1 - 2009/1/21

N2 - Many laboratories develop depth-encoding detectors to improve the trade-off between spatial resolution and sensitivity in positron emission tomography (PET) scanners. One challenge in implementing these detectors is the need to calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for the large numbers of detector elements in a scanner. In this work, we evaluate two different methods, a linear detector calibration and a linear crystal calibration, for determining DOI calibration parameters. Both methods can use measurements from any source distribution and location, or even the intrinsic lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) background activity, and are therefore well suited for use in a depth-encoding PET scanner. The methods were evaluated by measuring detector and crystal DOI responses for all eight detectors in a prototype depth-encoding PET scanner. The detectors utilize dual-ended readout of LSO scintillator arrays with position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes (PSAPDs). The LSO arrays have 7 × 7 elements, with a crystal size of 0.92 × 0.92 × 20 mm3 and pitch of 1.0 mm. The arrays are read out by two 8 × 8 mm2 area PSAPDs placed at opposite ends of the arrays. DOI is measured by the ratio of the amplitude of the total energy signals measured by the two PSAPDs. Small variations were observed in the DOI responses of different crystals within an array as well as DOI responses for different arrays. A slightly nonlinear dependence of the DOI ratio on depth was observed and the nonlinearity was larger for the corner and edge crystals. The DOI calibration parameters were obtained from the DOI responses measured in a singles mode. The average error between the calibrated DOI and the known DOI was 0.8 mm if a linear detector DOI calibration was used and 0.5 mm if a linear crystal DOI calibration was used. A line source phantom and a hot rod phantom were scanned on the prototype PET scanner. DOI measurement significantly improved the image spatial resolution no matter which DOI calibration method was used. A linear crystal DOI calibration provided slightly better image spatial resolution compared with a linear detector DOI calibration.

AB - Many laboratories develop depth-encoding detectors to improve the trade-off between spatial resolution and sensitivity in positron emission tomography (PET) scanners. One challenge in implementing these detectors is the need to calibrate the depth of interaction (DOI) response for the large numbers of detector elements in a scanner. In this work, we evaluate two different methods, a linear detector calibration and a linear crystal calibration, for determining DOI calibration parameters. Both methods can use measurements from any source distribution and location, or even the intrinsic lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) background activity, and are therefore well suited for use in a depth-encoding PET scanner. The methods were evaluated by measuring detector and crystal DOI responses for all eight detectors in a prototype depth-encoding PET scanner. The detectors utilize dual-ended readout of LSO scintillator arrays with position-sensitive avalanche photodiodes (PSAPDs). The LSO arrays have 7 × 7 elements, with a crystal size of 0.92 × 0.92 × 20 mm3 and pitch of 1.0 mm. The arrays are read out by two 8 × 8 mm2 area PSAPDs placed at opposite ends of the arrays. DOI is measured by the ratio of the amplitude of the total energy signals measured by the two PSAPDs. Small variations were observed in the DOI responses of different crystals within an array as well as DOI responses for different arrays. A slightly nonlinear dependence of the DOI ratio on depth was observed and the nonlinearity was larger for the corner and edge crystals. The DOI calibration parameters were obtained from the DOI responses measured in a singles mode. The average error between the calibrated DOI and the known DOI was 0.8 mm if a linear detector DOI calibration was used and 0.5 mm if a linear crystal DOI calibration was used. A line source phantom and a hot rod phantom were scanned on the prototype PET scanner. DOI measurement significantly improved the image spatial resolution no matter which DOI calibration method was used. A linear crystal DOI calibration provided slightly better image spatial resolution compared with a linear detector DOI calibration.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=58149260329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=58149260329&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1088/0031-9155/54/2/017

DO - 10.1088/0031-9155/54/2/017

M3 - Article

VL - 54

SP - 433

EP - 445

JO - Physics in Medicine and Biology

JF - Physics in Medicine and Biology

SN - 0031-9155

IS - 2

ER -