Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance assessment of the ALBIRA II pre-clinical SPECT S102 system for 99mTc imaging

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Nuclear Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The performance characteristics of the SPECT sub-system S102 of the ALBIRA II PET/SPECT/CT are analyzed for the 80 mm field of view (FOV) to evaluate the potential in-vivo imaging in rats, based on measurements of the system response for the commonly used Technetium-99 m (99mTc) in small animal imaging.

Methods

The ALBIRA II tri-modal µPET/SPECT/CT pre-clinical system (Bruker BioSpin, Ettlingen, Germany) was used. The SPECT modality is made up of two opposite gamma cameras (Version S102) with Sodium doped Cesium Iodide (CsI(Na)) single continuous crystal detectors coupled to position-sensitive photomultipliers (PSPMTs). Imaging was performed with the NEMA NU-4 image quality phantom (Data Spectrum Corporation, Durham, USA). Measurements were performed with a starting activity concentration of 4.76 MBq/mL 99mTc. An energy window of 20% at 140 keV was selected in this study. The system offers a 20 mm, 40 mm, 60 mm and an 80 mm field of view (FOV) and in this study the 80 mm FOV was used for all the acquisitions. The data were reconstructed with an ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm. Sensitivity, spatial resolution, count rate linearity, convergence of the algorithm and the recovery coefficients (RC) were analyzed. All analyses were performed with PMOD and MATLAB software.

Results

The sensitivities measured at the center of the 80 mm FOV with the point source were 23.1 ± 0.3 cps/MBq (single pinhole SPH) and 105.6 ± 5.5 cps/MBq (multi pinhole MPH). The values for the axial, tangential and radial full width at half maximum (FWHM) were 2.51, 2.54, and 2.55 mm with SPH and 2.35, 2.44 and 2.32 mm with MPH, respectively. The corresponding RC values for the 5 mm, 4 mm, 3 mm and 2 mm rods were 0.60 ± 0.28, 0.61 ± 0.24, 0.29 ± 0.11 and 0.20 ± 0.06 with SPH and 0.56 ± 0.20, 0.50 ± 0.18, 0.38 ± 0.09 and 0.23 ± 0.06 with MPH. To obtain quantitative imaging data, the image reconstructions should be performed with 12 iterations.

Conclusion

The ALBIRA II preclinical SPECT sub-system S102 has a favorable sensitivity and spatial resolution for the 80 mm FOV setting for both the SPH and MPH configurations and is a valuable tool for small animal imaging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Franc BL, Acton PD, Mari C, Hasegawa BH. Small-animal SPECT and SPECT/CT: important tools for preclinical investigation. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:1651–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Khalil MM, Tremoleda JL, Bayomy TB, Gsell W. Molecular SPECT imaging: an overview. Int J Mol Imaging. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/796025.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Seo Y, Jiang H, Franc BL. Preclinical SPECT and SPECT/CT, in molecular imaging in oncology. Heidelberg: Springer; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Beyer T, Freudenberg LS, Townsend DW, Czernin J. The future of hybrid imaging-part 1: hybrid imaging technologies and SPECT/CT. Insights Imaging. 2011;2:161–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Golestani R, Wu C, Tio RA, Zeebregts CJ, Petrov AD, Beekman FJ, et al. Small-animal SPECT and SPECT/CT: application in cardiovascular research. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:1766–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vallabhajosula S. Molecular imaging. Radiopharmaceuticals for PET and SPECT. Berlin: Springer; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Glatting G, Bardiès M, Lassmann M. Treatment planning in molecular radiotherapy. Z Med Phys. 2013;23:262–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hardiansyah D, Attarwala AA, Kletting P, Mottaghy FM, Glatting G. Prediction of time-integrated activity coefficients in PRRT using simulated dynamic PET and a pharmacokinetic model. Phys Med. 2017;42:298–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Jiménez-Franco LD, Kletting P, Beer AJ, Glatting G. Treatment planning algorithm for peptide receptor radionuclide therapy considering multiple tumor lesions and organs at risk. Med Phys. 2018;45:3516–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Attarwala AA, Karanja YW, Hardiansyah D, Romanó C, Roscher M, Wängler B, et al. Investigation of the imaging characteristics of the ALBIRA II small animal PET system for 18F, 68Ga and 64Cu. Z Med Phys. 2017;27:132–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sánchez F, Orero A, Soriano A, Correcher C, Conde P, Gonzalez A, et al. ALBIRA: a small animal PET/SPECT/CT imaging system. Med Phys. 2013;40:051906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Wirrwar AK, Nikolaus S, Schramm NU, Arkian S, Cohnen M. Müller HW [TierSPECT: performance of a dedicated small-animal-SPECT camera and first in vivo measurements]. Z Med Phys. 2005;15:14–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Spinks TJ, Karia D, Leach MO, Flux G. Quantitative PET and SPECT performance characteristics of the Albira Trimodal pre-clinical tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 2014;59:715–31.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Glatting G, Reske SN. Treatment of radioactive decay in pharmacokinetic modeling: influence on parameter estimation in cardiac 13N-PET. Med Phys. 1999;26:616–21.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Attarwala AA, Hardiansyah D, Romanó C, Roscher M, Molina-Duran F, Wängler B, et al. A method for point spread function estimation for accurate quantitative imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2018;65:961–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. NEMA. Performance measurements of small animal positron emission tomographs. Rosslyn: NEMA Standard Publications; 2008. (NU 4).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Beekman FJ, van der Have F, Vastenhouw B, van der Linden AJ, van Rijk PP, Burbach JP, et al. U-SPECT-I: a novel system for submillimeter-resolution tomography with radiolabeled molecules in mice. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1194–200.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Metzler SD, Bowsher JE, Smith MF, Jaszczak RJ. Analytic determination of pinhole collimator sensitivity with penetration. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2001;20:730–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Soret M, Bacharach SL, Buvat I. Partial-volume effect in PET tumor imaging. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:932–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Togawa T, Yui N, Kinoshita F, Yanagisawa M. Quantitative evaluation in tumor SPECT and the effect of tumor size: fundamental study with phantom. Ann Nucl Med. 1997;11:51–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Takahashi Y, Miyagawa M, Nishiyama Y, Ishimura H, Mochizuki T. Performance of a semiconductor SPECT system: comparison with a conventional Anger-type SPECT instrument. Ann Nucl Med. 2013;27:11–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Umeda IO, Tani K, Tsuda K, Kobayashi M, Ogata M, Kimura S, et al. High resolution SPECT imaging for visualization of intratumoral heterogeneity using a SPECT/CT scanner dedicated for small animal imaging. Ann Nucl Med. 2012;26:67–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Schramm N, Hoppin J, Lackas C, Gershman B, Norenberg J, de Jong M. Improving resolution, sensitivity and applications for the NanoSPECT/CT: a high-performance SPECT/CT imager for small-animal research. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:436P.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Deleye S, van Holen R, Verhaeghe J, Vanderberghe S, Stroobants S, Staelens S. Performance evaluation of small-animal multipinhole μSPECT scanners for mouse imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;40:744–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Nikolaus S, Wirrwar A, Antke C, Kley K. Müller HW [State-of-the-art of small animal imaging with high-resolution SPECT]. Nuklearmedizin. 2005;44:257–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. van der Have F, Vanstenhouw B, Ramakers RM, Branderhorst W, Krah JO, Ji C, et al. U-SPECT-II: an ultra-high-resolution device for molecular small-animal imaging. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:599–605.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the colleagues from Bruker Biospin GmbH, Ettlingen, Germany for the helpful discussions during the course of this research. This research project is part of the Research Campus M2OLIE and funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the Framework “Forschungscampus – public-private partnership for Innovations” under the funding code 13GW0388A and 13GW0091E.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ali Asgar Attarwala and Deni Hardiansyah contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Medical Radiation Physics/Radiation Protection, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167, Mannheim, Germany

    Ali Asgar Attarwala, Deni Hardiansyah, Chiara Romanó, Luis David Jiménez-Franco & Gerhard Glatting

  2. Medical Physics and Biophysics Research Group, Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences (FMIPA), Universitas Indonesia, Depok, 16424, Indonesia

    Deni Hardiansyah

  3. ABX-CRO Advanced Pharmaceutical Services Forschungsgesellschaft GmbH, 01307, Dresden, Germany

    Luis David Jiménez-Franco

  4. Molecular Imaging and Radiochemistry, Department for Clinical Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, 68167, Mannheim, Germany

    Mareike Roscher & Björn Wängler

  5. Radiooncology/Radiobiology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), 69120, Heidelberg, Germany

    Mareike Roscher

  6. Medical Radiation Physics, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ulm University, 89081, Ulm, Germany

    Gerhard Glatting

Authors
  1. Ali Asgar Attarwala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Deni Hardiansyah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chiara Romanó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luis David Jiménez-Franco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mareike Roscher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Björn Wängler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gerhard Glatting
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Deni Hardiansyah.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Attarwala, A.A., Hardiansyah, D., Romanó, C. et al. Performance assessment of the ALBIRA II pre-clinical SPECT S102 system for 99mTc imaging. Ann Nucl Med 35, 111–120 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-020-01547-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12149-020-01547-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation