OJRad  Vol.5 No.2 , June 2015
Development and Assessment of Quality Control Phantom for Linearity and Uniformity
Abstract: Abstract: The aim of this study was to develop a cheap, locally made and friendly applicable phantom for gamma camera quality control and to test its validity relative to standard results (intrinsic and extrinsic spatial linearity and intrinsic and extrinsic uniformity) of gamma camera SPECT. And the significance of this experimental study was to introduce a multi-purpose phantom for gamma camera which could overcome the risk accompanied by quality control test procedure such as detector crystal damage and the appearance of moiré patterns. The results of the developed phantom showed an average count difference of 0.7% relative to the standard phantom and about 4% in X- to Y-axis directions relative to the standard phantom. Also, the measured absolute linearity was 0.63 mm in X direction and 0.64 mm in Y direction for the UFOV compare with 0.70 mm value of acceptance test. And the I.U. and D.U. of the developed phantom were 3.18% and 2.27% respectively for the UFOV relative to the standard phantom I.U. and D.U. (2.0% and 1.5%) for the UFOV respectively.
Cite this paper: Gar-Elnabi, M. , M. Ali, W. , Omer, M. , Sam, A. and Edam, G. (2015) Development and Assessment of Quality Control Phantom for Linearity and Uniformity. Open Journal of Radiology, 5, 59-65. doi: 10.4236/ojrad.2015.52010.

[1]   Anger, H.O. (1958) Scintillation Camera. Review of Scientific Instruments, 29, 27-33.

[2]   Seo, Y., Aparici, C.M. and Hasegawa, B.H. (2008) Technological Development and Advances in Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography/Computed Tomography. Seminars in Nuclear Medicine, 38, 177-198.

[3]   Cherry, S.R., Sorenson, J.A. and Phelps, M.E. (2003) Physics in Nuclear Medicine. Saunders, Philadelphia.

[4]   Jaszczak, R.J., Coleman, R.E. and Lim CB. (1980) SPECT: Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, NS-27, 1137-1153.

[5]   Pat, Z. (2008) Routine Quality Control of Clinical Nuclear Medicine Instrumentation: A Brief Review. The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 49, 1114-1131.

[6]   Lin, P.-J. P., Borras, C., et al. (1993) Specification and Acceptance Testing of Computed Tomography Scanner. American Association of Physics in Medicine, New York.

[7]   Graham, L.S., Fahey, F.H., Madsen, M.T., van Aswegen, A. and Yester, M.V. (1995) Quantitation of SPECT Performance: Report of Task Group 4, Nuclear Medicine Committee. Medical Physics, 22, 401-409.

[8]   Van Staden, J.A., Dv Raan, H., lotter, M.G., Van Aswegan, A. and Herbst, C.P. (2007) Production of Radioactive Quality Assurance Phantoms Using Standard Inkjet Printer. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 52, N 329-N 337.

[9]   Bone, F.J., Graham, K.D. and Dowdey, J.E. (1971) Image Aberration Produced By Multi-Channel Collimators for a Scintillation Camera. Radiology, 98, 329-334.

[10]   O’Conner, M.K., Clinic, M. and Rochester, M.N. Quality Control of Scintillation Cameras (Planar and SPECT).

[11]   Doed, S.B. (1994) Practical Radiation Protection and Applied Radiobiology. W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia.

[12]   Smith, E.M. (1998) Scintillation Camera Quality Control, Part 1: Establishing the Quality Control Program. Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology, 26, 9-13.

[13]   Ejeh, J.E., Adedapo, K.S., Akinlade, B.I. and Osifo, B.O. (2011) Gamma Camera Intrinsic Uniformity in an Unstable Power Supply Environment. Hellenic Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 14, 146-148.

[14]   Young, K.C., Kouris, K., Awdeh, M. and Abdel-Dayem, H.M. (1990) Reproducibility and Action Level for Gamma Camera Uniformity. Nuclear Medicine Communications, 11, 95-101.

[15]   International Atomic Energy Agency (1991) Quality Control of Nuclear Medicine Instrumentations. IAEATECDOC602.

[16]   National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) (2001) Performance Measurements of Scintillation Cameras. NEMA Standards Publication NU 1-2001, Global Engineering Documents. Washington DC.

[17]   Ng, A.H., Ng, K.H., Dharmendra, H. and Perkins, A.C. (2009) A Low-Cost Phantom for Simple Routine Testing of Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) Cameras. Applied Radiation and Isotopes, 67, 1864-1868.

[18]   Holstensson, M., Partridge, M., Buckley, S.E. and Flux, G.D. (2010) The Effect of Energy and Source Location on Gamma Camera Intrinsic and Extrinsic Spatial Resolution: An Experimental and Monte Carlo Study. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 55, 1735-1751.

[19]   Holstensson, M., Hindrof, C., Ljungberg, M., Partridge, M. and Flux, G.D. (2007) Optimization of Energy-Window Setting for Scatter Correction in Quantitative 111in Imaging: Comparison of Measurements and Monte Carlo Simulations. Cancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals, 22, 136-142.

[20]   Islamian, J.P., Toossi, M.T.B., Momennezhad, M., Naseri, S. and Ljungberg, M. (2012) Simulation of a Quality Control Jaszczak Phantom with SIMIND Monte Carlo and Adding the Phantom as an Accessory to the Program. Iranian Journal of Medical Physics, 9, 135-140.