Monte Carlo simulation and performance assessment of GE Discovery 690 VCT positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanner

Elham Kashian; Hadi Ahangari; Vahab Dehlaghi; Karim Khoshgard; Pardis Ghafarian; Raheb Ghorbani

doi:10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_4_20

World Journal of Nuclear Medicine, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · World J Nucl Med 2020; 19(04): 366-375
DOI: 10.4103/wjnm.WJNM_4_20

Original Article

Monte Carlo simulation and performance assessment of GE Discovery 690 VCT positron emission tomography/computed tomography scanner

Authors

Elham Kashian

Department of Biomedical Engineering and Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah
Hadi Ahangari

¹Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of medicine, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan
Vahab Dehlaghi

Department of Biomedical Engineering and Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah
Karim Khoshgard

²Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah
Pardis Ghafarian

³Chronic Respiratory Diseases Research Center, National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (NRITLD)

⁴PET/CT and Cyclotron Center, Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Raheb Ghorbani

⁵Department of Social Medicine, Faculty of medicine, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan

Abstract

The aim of this study is to simulate GE Discovery 690 VCT positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanner using Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission (GATE) simulation package (version 8). Then, we assess the performance of scanner by comparing measured and simulated parameter results. Detection system and geometry of PET scanner that consists of 13,824 LYSO crystals designed in 256 blocks and 24 ring detectors were modeled. In order to achieve a precise model, we verified scanner model. Validation was based on a comparison between simulation data and experimental results obtained with this scanner in the same situation. Parameters used for validation were sensitivity, spatial resolution, and contrast. Image quality assessment was done based on comparing the contrast recovery coefficient (CRC) of simulated and measured images. The findings demonstrate that the mean difference between simulated and measured sensitivity is <7%. The simulated spatial resolution agreed to within <5.5% of the measured values. Contrast results had a slight divergence within the range below 4%. The image quality validation study demonstrated an acceptable agreement in CRC for 8:1 and 2:1 source-to-background activity ratio. Validated performance parameters showed good agreement between experimental data and simulated results and demonstrated that GATE is a valid simulation tool for simulating this scanner model. The simulated model of this scanner can be used for future studies regarding optimization of image reconstruction algorithms and emission acquisition protocols.

Keywords

Digital phantom - Geant4 Application for Tomographic Emission - Monte Carlo simulation - positron emission tomography scanner - validation

Full Text

References

References
1 Foster B, Bagci U, Mansoor A, Xu Z, Mollura DJ. A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images. Comput Biol Med 2014;50:76-96.
2 Bagci U, Udupa JK, Mendhiratta N, Foster B, Xu Z, Yao J, et al. Joint segmentation of anatomical and functional images: Applications in quantification of lesions from PET, PET-CT, MRI-PET, and MRI-PET-CT images. Med Image Anal 2013;17:929-45.
3 MacManus M, Nestle U, Rosenzweig KE, Carrio I, Messa C, Belohlavek O, et al. Use of PET and PET/CT for radiation therapy planning: IAEA expert report 2006-2007. Radiother Oncol 2009;91:85-94.
4 Kinahan PE, Doot RK, Wanner-Roybal M, Bidaut LM, Armato SG, Meyer CR, et al. PET/CT assessment of response to therapy: Tumor change measurement, truth data, and error. Transl Oncol 2009;2:223-30.
5 Jan S, Santin G, Strul D, Staelens S, Assié K, Autret D, et al. GATE: A simulation toolkit for PET and SPECT. Phys Med Biol 2004;49:4543-61.
6 Yu K, Chen X, Shi F, Zhu W, Zhang B, Xiang D. A novel 3D graph cut based co-segmentation of lung tumor on PET-CT images with Gaussian mixture models. In medical imaging 2016: Image processing. Int Soc Optics Photonics 2016;9784:97842V.
7 Bagci U, Udupa JK, Yao J, Mollura DJ. Co-segmentation of functional and anatomical images. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2012;15:459-67.
8 Baghaei H, Zhang Y, Li H, Wang Y, Kim S, Ramirez RA, et al. GATE Monte Carlo simulation of a high-sensitivity and high-resolution LSO-based small animal PET camera. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2007;54:1568-73.
9 Schmidtlein CR, Kirov AS, Nehmeh SA, Erdi YE, Humm JL, Amols HI, et al. Validation of GATE Monte Carlo simulations of the GE Advance/Discovery LS PET scanners. Med Phys 2006;33:198-208.
10 Bettinardi V, Presotto L, Rapisarda E, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC. Physical performance of the new hybrid PET / CT Discovery-690. Med Phys 2011;38:5394-411.
11 Ljungberg M, Strand SE, King MA. Monte Carlo Calculations in Nuclear Medicine: Applications in Diagnostic Imaging. United Satates: CRC Press; 2012. p. 278-312.
12 Zaidi H. Relevance of accurate Monte Carlo modeling in nuclear medical imaging. Med Phys 1999;26:574-608.
13 Buvat I, Castiglioni I. Monte Carlo simulations in SPET and PET. Q J Nucl Med 2002;46:48-61.
14 Strulab D, Santin G, Lazaro D, Breton V, Morel C. GATE (Geant4 application for tomographic emission): A PET/SPECT general-purpose simulation platform. Nucl Phys B 2003;125:75-9.
15 Waters LS. MCNPX User's Manual. United States: Los Alamos National Laboratory; 2002. p 1-5.
16 Agostinelli S, Allison J, Amako Ka, Apostolakis J, Araujo H, Arce P, et al. EANT4 – A simulation toolkit. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2003;506:250-303.
17 Assie K, Breton V, Buvat I, Comtat C, Jan S, Krieguer M, et al. Monte Carlo simulation in PET and SPECT instrumentation using GATE. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2004;527:180-9.
18 Lamare F, Turzo A, Bizais Y, Le Rest CC, Visvikis D. Validation of a Monte Carlo simulation of the Philips Allegro/GEMINI PET systems using GATE. Phys Med Biol 2006;51:943-62.
19 Nikolopoulos D, Michail C, Valais I, Yannakopoulos P, Kottou S, Karpetas G, et al. GATE simulation of the biograph 2 PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 2014;5:2.
20 Jan S, Comtat C, Strul D, Santin G, Trebossen R. Monte Carlo simulation for the ECAT EXACT HR+ system using GATE. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2005;52:627-33.
21 Zagni F, D'Ambrosio D, Spinelli AE, Cicoria G, Fanti S, Marengo M. Accurate modeling of a DOI capable small animal PET scanner using GATE. Appl Radiat Isot 2013;75:105-14.
22 Zeraatkar N, Ay MR, Kamali-Asl AR, Zaidi H. Accurate Monte Carlo modeling and performance assessment of the X-PET subsystem of the FLEX triumph preclinical PET/CT scanner. Med Phys 2011;38:1217-25.
23 Staelens S, Strul D, Santin G, Vandenberghe S, Koole M, D'Asseler Y, et al. Monte Carlo simulations of a scintillation camera using GATE: Validation and application modelling. Phys Med Biol 2003;48:3021-42.
24 Sakellios N, Rubio JL, Karakatsanis N, Kontaxakis G, Loudos G, Santos A, et al. GATE simulations for small animal SPECT/PET using voxelized phantoms and rotating-head detectors. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec 2006;4:2000-3.
25 Vieira L, Vaz TF, Costa DC, Almeida P. Monte Carlo simulation of the basic features of the GE Millennium MG single photon emission computed tomography gamma camera. Rev Esp Med Nucl Imagen Mol 2014;33:6-13.
26 Aklan B, Jakoby BW, Watson CC, Braun H, Ritt P, Quick HH. GATE Monte Carlo simulations for variations of an integrated PET/MR hybrid imaging system based on the Biograph mMR model. Phys Med Biol 2015;60:4731-52.
27 Lee S, Gregor J, Osborne D. Development and validation of a complete GATE model of the Siemens Inveon trimodal imaging platform. Mol Imaging 2013;12:1-3.
28 Karakatsanis N, Sakellios N, Tsantilas N, Dikaios N, Tsoumpas C, Lazaro D, et al. Comparative evaluation of two commercial PET scanners, ECAT EXACT HR+ and Biograph 2, using GATE. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2006;569:368-72.
29 Lecoq P, Gektin A, Korzhik M. Inorganic Scintillators for Detector Systems: Physical Principles and Crystal Engineering. Switzerland: Springer; 2016. p. 175-92.
30 van Eijk CW. Inorganic scintillators in medical imaging. Phys Med Biol 2002;47:R85-106.
31 Stortz G, Walker M, Thompson C, Goertzen A, Retiere F, Zhang X, et al. Characterization of a new MR compatible small animal PET scanner using Monte-Carlo simulations. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2013;60:1637-44.
32 Eriksson L, Wienhard K, Dahlbom M. A simple data loss model for positron camera systems. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1994;41:1566-70.
33 Thielemans K, Tsoumpas C, Mustafovic S, Beisel T, Aguiar P, Dikaios N, et al. STIR: Software for tomographic image reconstruction release 2. Phys Med Biol 2012;57:867-83.
34 Grogg KS, Toole T, Ouyang J, Zhu X, Normandin MD, Li Q, et al. National electrical Manufacturers association and clinical evaluation of a novel brain PET/CT scanner. J Nucl Med 2016;57:646-52.
35 Wilson DW, Furenlid LR, Barrett HH, Chen YC. A new PET system for small-animal imaging. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec (1997) 2004;6:3389-92.