Skip to main content

Atlas of SPECT Quality Control and Examples of Artifacts

  • Chapter
Selected Atlases of Bone Scintigraphy

Part of the book series: Atlases of Clinical Nuclear Medicine ((ATLASES))

  • 82 Accesses

Abstract

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.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Keyes JW Jr. Perspectives on tomography. J Nucl Med. 1982;23:633–640.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Myers MJ, Fazio F. The case for emission computed tomography with a rotating camera. Appl Radiol/NM. 1981;10:127–134.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuhl DE, Barrio JR, Huang SC, et al. Quantifying local cerebral blood flow by N-isopropyl-p[I-123]iodoamphetamine (IMP) tomography. J Nucl Med. 1982;23:196–203.

    PubMed  CAS  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 

  9. Saw CB, Clarke LP, Serafini AN. Influence of zoom factor on centre-of-rotation of the SPECT system and on the resolution of tomographic images. Nucl Med Commun. 1987;8:3–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  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 

  11. Chang W, Shuqiang L, Williams JJ, et al. New methods of examining gamma camera collimators. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:676–683.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Busemann-Sokole E. Measurement of collimator hole angulation and camera head tilt for slant and parallel hole collimators used in SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1987;28:1592–1598.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Malmin RE, Stanley PC, Guth WR. Collimator angulation error and its effect on SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1990;31:655–659.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Silverstein EA, Spies SM. Evaluation of parallel hole collimators used for SPECT imaging. Phys Med Biol. 1988;33(Suppl I):112. Abstract

    Google 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 

  16. Rogers WL, Clinthorne HN, Harkness BA, et al. Flood-field requirements for emission computed tomography with an Anger camera. J Nucl Med. 1982;23:162–168.

    PubMed  CAS  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 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Graham, L.S., Lake, R.R., Cohen, M.B. (1992). Atlas of SPECT Quality Control and Examples of Artifacts. In: Abreu, S.H., Van Nostrand, D., Ziessman, H.A. (eds) Selected Atlases of Bone Scintigraphy. Atlases of Clinical Nuclear Medicine. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2926-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2926-1_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-7722-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-2926-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics