Journal of Medical Physics (Jan 2016)

Application of Chang's attenuation correction technique for single-photon emission computed tomography partial angle acquisition of Jaszczak phantom

  • Krishnendu Saha,
  • Sean C Hoyt,
  • Bryon M Murray

DOI
https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-6203.177278
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 41, no. 1
pp. 29 – 33

Abstract

Read online

The acquisition and processing of the Jaszczak phantom is a recommended test by the American College of Radiology for evaluation of gamma camera system performance. To produce the reconstructed phantom image for quality evaluation, attenuation correction is applied. The attenuation of counts originating from the center of the phantom is greater than that originating from the periphery of the phantom causing an artifactual appearance of inhomogeneity in the reconstructed image and complicating phantom evaluation. Chang's mathematical formulation is a common method of attenuation correction applied on most gamma cameras that do not require an external transmission source such as computed tomography, radionuclide sources installed within the gantry of the camera or a flood source. Tomographic acquisition can be obtained in two different acquisition modes for dual-detector gamma camera; one where the two detectors are at 180° configuration and acquire projection images for a full 360°, and the other where the two detectors are positioned at a 90° configuration and acquire projections for only 180°. Though Chang's attenuation correction method has been used for 360° angle acquisition, its applicability for 180° angle acquisition remains a question with one vendor's camera software producing artifacts in the images. This work investigates whether Chang's attenuation correction technique can be applied to both acquisition modes by the development of a Chang's formulation-based algorithm that is applicable to both modes. Assessment of attenuation correction performance by phantom uniformity analysis illustrates improved uniformity with the proposed algorithm (22.6%) compared to the camera software (57.6%).

Keywords