Atlas of SPECT Quality Control and Examples of Artifacts
Numerous articles have documented the advantages of Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) in a wide variety of clinical studies.1–4 The production of high quality diagnostic studies demands the highest performance from the camera and computer and careful attention to detail by the technologist conducting the study. Scintillation cameras with minor nonuniformities may give satisfactory planar images but if used for SPECT imaging may produce images that provide less diagnostic information or even create false positives.5,6 The purpose of this chapter is to describe a quality control (QC) program, to recommend the appropriate frequencies for performing quality control tests, and to provide examples of common problems. The following topics will be discussed: X and Y axes calibration, center-of-rotation, field uniformity correction, and phantoms.
KeywordsSingle Photon Emission Compute Tomography Attenuation Correction Single Photon Emission Compute Tomography Image Single Photon Emission Compute Tomography Study Ring Artifact
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Myers MJ, Fazio F. The case for emission computed tomography with a rotating camera. Appl Radiol/NM. 1981;10:127–134.Google Scholar
- 4.Jaszczak RJ, Whitehead FR, Lim CB, et al. Lesion detection with single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) compared with conventional imaging. J Nucl Med. 1982;23:96–102.Google Scholar
- 5.Harkness BA, Rogers WL, Clinthorne HN, et al. Quality control procedures and artifact identifications. J Nucl Med Tech. 1983;11:55–60.Google Scholar
- 6.Greer KL, Coleman RE, Jaszczak RJ. SPECT: a practical guide for users. J Nucl Med Tech. 1983;11:61–65.Google Scholar
- 7.English RJ, Brown SE. SPECT Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography: A Primer. New York: The Society of Nuclear Medicine; 1986.Google Scholar
- 8.Graham LS. A rational quality assurance program for SPECT instrumentation. In: Freeman LM, Weissmann HS, eds. Nuclear Medicine Annual 1989. New York: Raven Press; 1989:81–108.Google Scholar
- 10.Single photon emission computerised tomographic (SPECT) systems using rotating scintillation cameras. 1986 draft to be added to Quality Control of Nuclear Medicine Instruments. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1984.Google Scholar
- 14.Silverstein EA, Spies SM. Evaluation of parallel hole collimators used for SPECT imaging. Phys Med Biol. 1988;33(Suppl I):112. AbstractGoogle Scholar
- 15.Lamoureux G, Verba J, Halpern SE. A new technique for the evaluation of hole parallelism in collimators used for SPECT. Clin Nucl Med. 1988; 13(Suppl):P20.Google Scholar
- 17.Todd-Pokropek A, Zerowski S, Soussaline F. Nonuniformity and artifact creation in emission tomography. J Nucl Med. 1980;21:P38. Abstract.Google Scholar
- 18.Collier BD, Slizofski WJ, Krasnow AZ. SPECT bone imaging (lumbar spine, hips, knees, and temporomandibular joint). In: Van Nostrand D, Baum S, eds. Atlas of Nuclear Medicine. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Co; 1988:360–382.Google Scholar
- 19.Burst KD, Graham MM. Aspects of patient imaging with SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1987;15:133–137.Google Scholar