Abstract.
In this paper, we investigate the spatial distribution of positron annihilation events in PET//MRI systems. A spherical source ranging from 0mm to 10mm in radius was placed in water to represent the tumor region. The magnetic field strength was adjusted from 0T to 30T, and three positron nuclides, 18F , 11C , 68Ga , were used. The positron annihilation distribution was compared with the nuclide distribution (to represent pathological tumor), and the differences in these distribution with and without the magnetic field were evaluated. The compression effect of magnetic field on positron distribution was also investigated. For 11C and 68Ga sources with radioactive source size (rs) of less than 4 mm and 6 mm, respectively, it was found that the critical radius (d of the sphere, which contains 90% annihilated positrons, was significantly larger than its original radioactive source size rs. When the magnetic field was increased to 15T, it was found that the greatest compression occurred with a 2 mm 68Ga source (which also exhibited the greatest contraction in volume V1 although this was larger than the source volume V . Our proposed model of the volume source indicates that the positron distribution deviates greatly from the nuclide distribution for high-energy positron emitted in small source.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
C. Hugenschmidt, Surf. Sci. Rep. 71, 547 (2016)
K. Sato et al., Radiat. Phys. Chem. 78, 1085 (2009)
P.J. Schultz, K.G. Lynn, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60, 701 (1988)
R.W. Siegel, Annu. Rev. Mater. Sci. 10, 393 (1980)
B. Bergersen, E. Pajanne, Appl. Phys. 4, 25 (1974)
X. Ning et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B 397, 75 (2017)
M. Yamawaki et al., Mater. Sci. Forum 733, 310 (2013)
A.J. Reader, Phys. Med. 24, 49 (2008)
L.M. Fraile et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 814, 110 (2016)
T.J. Fraum et al., Acad. Radiol. 23, 220 (2016)
J.L. Carreras-Delgado et al., Rev. Esp. Med. Nucl. Imagen Mol. 35, 313 (2016)
J. Baxa et al., Eur. J. Radiol. 94, A35 (2017)
E. Ferdova et al., Eur. J. Radiol. 94, A52 (2017)
M. Soret et al., J. Nucl. Med. 48, 932 (2007)
O. Bertolli et al., Phys. Med. 32, 323 (2016)
C. Li et al., Eur. Phys. J. Plus 132, 484 (2017)
J.C. Cheng et al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 62, 101 (2015)
T.R. Miller, P.W. Grigsby, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 53, 353 (2002)
R. Kraus et al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 59, 1900 (2012)
J.C. Cheng, in Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging (IEEE, 2014) https://doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2014.7431012
D. Burdette, in 2007 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, Vol. 5 (IEEE, 2007) pp. 3383--3389, https://doi.org/10.1109/NSSMIC.2007.4436857
G. Soultanidis et al., J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 317, 012021 (2011)
A. Hattori et al., Ann. Thorac. Surg. 102, 407 (2016)
A.H. Wolfson et al., Gynecol. Oncol. 141, 255 (2016)
J.C. Walsh et al., Hum. Pathol. 56, 123 (2016)
F. Garibaldi et al., Eur. Phys. J. Plus 132, 396 (2017)
A. Goertzen et al., EJNMMI Phys. 2, A54 (2015)
A. Jena et al., Eur. J. Radiol. 86, 261 (2017)
F. Nishikido et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 863, 55 (2017)
A.A. Attarwala et al., Z. Med. Phys. 27, 132 (2017)
J. Allison et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 835, 186 (2016)
M. Pagani et al., Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imag. 24, 1301 (1997)
H. Napieczynska et al., NeuroImage 158, 112 (2017)
E.L. Cole et al., Bioorg. Med. Chem. 25, 5407 (2017)
X. Yang et al., Biomaterials 32, 4151 (2011)
G. Nagy et al., Eur. J. Pharm. Sci. 106, 336 (2017)
A.S. Johnson, presented at the International Conference on Computing in High-Energy Physics, Chicago, Illinois, United States (1998)
R. Brun, F. Rademakers, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 389, 81 (1997)
D.L. Alexoff et al., Nucl. Med. Biol. 38, 191 (2011)
Radionuclide Decay Data, https://doi.org/publicinformation/radardecaydata.cfm
C. Le Loirec, C. Champion, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 582, 644 (2007)
C. Le Loirec, C. Champion, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 582, 654 (2007)
W.W. Moses, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 648, S236 (2011)
R. Montironi et al., Eur. Urol. Suppl. 16, 223 (2017)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
The EPJ Publishers remain neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zheng, W., Cao, X., Li, C. et al. Study of the effects of source type and magnetic field on the spatial distribution of positron annihilation events in PET/MRI applications. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 134, 85 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2019-12445-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/i2019-12445-1