Instrumentation, Hardware and Methodology

Part of the Developments in Nuclear Medicine book series (DNUM, volume 25)


Having described the process of imaging the physiological distribution of radioactive Iodine (I-131) in the thyroid gland in 1952, Mayneord [1] set in motion the idea of nuclear medicine imaging as we know it today.


Gamma Camera Modulation Transfer Function Count Density Detector Head SPET Imaging 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Mayneord WV, Newbery SP. An automated method of studying the distribution of activity ina source of ionising radiation. Br J Radiol 1952;25:589.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anger HO. Scintillation camera with multichannel collimators. J Nucl Med1964;5:515–531.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cassen B, et al. Instruments for I-131 use in medical studies. Nucleonics 1951;9:46.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuhl DE, et al. A high contrast photographic recorder for scintillation counterscanning. Radiology 1956;66:730.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kereiakes JG. The history and development of medical physics instrumentation: Nuclearmedicine. Med Phys 1987;14:1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jaszczak RJ, et al. Three-dimensional SPECT reconstruction of combined cone beam and parallel beam data. Phys Med Biol 1992;37:3,535–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    YanXiao-Hong, et al. Cone beam tomography with circular, elliptical and spiralorbits. Phys Med Biol 1992;37:3,493–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Todd-Pokropek,Which SPECT ? Nucl Med Comm 1984;5:421–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    EvansNTS, et al. The Aberdeen Mark II single-photon-emission tomographic scanner:specification and some clinical applications. Phys Med Biol 1986;31:1,65–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    JaszczakRJ. Physical characteristics of SPECT systems. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1982;6:6,1205–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Morris PB, et al. Realising the SPECT capability of a rotating gamma camera: analternate approach. Phys Med Biol 1984;29:6, 733–37.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oppenheim BE, et al. Uniformity Correction for SPECT using a mapped cobalt-57 sheetsource. J Nucl Med 1985;26:409–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Saw CB, etal.Influence of zoom factor on centre-of-rotation of the SPECT system and on theresolution of tomographic images. Nucl Med Commun 1987;8:3,3–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gillen GJ, etal.Quality control of analogue to digital conversion circuitary for artefact-freeSPECT imaging.Phys Med Biol 1992;37:12,2175–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    White W. Resolution, sensitivity, and contrast in gamma-camera design: A criticalreview. Radiology 1979;132:179–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Whitehead,FR. Minimum detectable gray-scale differences in nuclear medicine images. JNucl Med 1978;19:87–93.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    AdamsR. Suggested Revision of NEMA standards. J Nucl Med 1984;25:814–16.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Murphy PH. Acceptance testing and quality control of gamma cameras, including SPECT J Nucl Med 1987;28:1221–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    IAEA-TECDOC -317,1984. Quality control of nuclear medicine instruments.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    AAPM Report no. 22, 1987. Rotating scintillation camera SPECT acceptance testing andquality control.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    NEMA revised 1986. Standards for performance measurements of scintillation cameras.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1995

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations