Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 31

Centre of Rotation: Is there a problem in the Y dimension? PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 49 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Centre of Rotation: Is there a problem in the Y dimension?. Stephen Brown - Southend Mike Avison - Bradford. Tc99m point source positioned on-axis In the ideal situation the source would appear in the central pixel in both heads. Y axis. Tc99m point source positioned on-axis.

Download Presentation

Centre of Rotation: Is there a problem in the Y dimension?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Centre of Rotation:Is there a problem in the Y dimension?

Stephen Brown - Southend

Mike Avison - Bradford


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Tc99m point source positioned on-axis

In the ideal situation the source would appear in the central pixel in both heads

Y axis


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Tc99m point source positioned on-axis

-the problem of sag (affects y alignment)

Y axis


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Y axis

Y error should be proportional to radius


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Y axis

Sometimes we used the 3 point IRC source

Y error on rear source is less than front source

-the radii are more similar for rear source


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Actual Variation of Y offset with radius

(rear)

(mid)

(front)


How did we measure irc y error

How did we measure IRC Y error

  • Acquire dual head 360° of data (point source)

  • Use Display A - FWHM

    • Place ROI over point, read Y centroid

    • Enter data in spread sheet

  • Interfile Export to Park

    • Automatic processing checks X too

  • Odyssey IRC test

    • gives misleading and ill defined results


How did we measure irc y error1

How did we measure IRC Y error

  • Acquire dual head 360° of data (point source)

  • Use Display A - FWHM

    • Place ROI over point, read Y centroid

    • Enter data in spread sheet

  • Interfile Export to Park independent computer

    • Automatic processing checks X too

  • Odyssey IRC test

    • gives misleading and ill defined results


How did we measure irc y error2

How did we measure IRC Y error?

  • Acquire dual head 360° of data (point source)

  • Use Display A - FWHM

    • Place ROI over point, read Y centroid

    • Enter data in spread sheet

  • Interfile Export to Park

    • Automatic processing checks X too

  • Odyssey IRC test

    • gives misleading and ill defined results


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Ref.

Ref.

<1.0

<0.5

<0.5

<1.0

<0.65

<1.5

Is this X or Y or a combination of both?

It’s a long way from 5mm so what does it mean?

I think I was !!!


Results heads at max radius 38 6 cm

Results(heads at max radius 38.6 cm)

Camera (collimator)Maximum Y deviation (mm)

FrontMidRear

Axis Southend(LEHR)7.75.53.6

Axis 1 BRI(LEGP)5.0

Axis 2 BRI(LEHR)7.45.35.2

Axis 1 BRI (MEGP)7.67.17.1

mean = 5.7

Acceptance criteria: typically 1 or 2mm maximum Y deviation


Is 5 mm too big

Is 5 mm too big?

  • We are hoping to resolve objects of about 10mm in SPECT of trunk sized volumes

  • What resolution do we aspire to for DAT scan?

  • Guidance from professional bodies state

    • 1mm or 2mm (range) as acceptable

  • How do other gamma cameras perform?


Is this bad performance

Is this bad performance?

Comparison with other brands of camera


Results by brand le collimators

Results - by brand (LE collimators)

CameraMax Y deviation (mm) Radius cm

Axis(avg)5.738

E Cam 3.133

Hawkeye1.733

Argus4.8(single head)33

Forte A5.434

Forte B5.434


Results by brand normalised normalised to 33cm radius le collimators

Results - by brand: NormalisedNormalised to 33cm radius (LE collimators)

CameraMax Y deviation (mm)

Axis(avg)5.0

E Cam 3.1

Hawkeye1.7

Argus4.8(single head)

Forte A5.2

Forte B5.2


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

word of warning ...

We tested with source on axis

Symmetrical constant misalignment (not sag).

As the gantry rotates, y-centroids remain fixed therefore no error detected

Y axis


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Y axis

Tc99m point source positioned off-axis

  • Source off centre in Y vertical direction

  • as the gantry rotates, y-centroids on each detector move

  • therefore the error is detected


General causes of cor errors

General Causes of COR errors

  • Misalignment of electronic and physical axis. (Electronic might change with angle)

  • Sag of detectors (Physical change with angle)

  • Detector misalignment

  • Collimators not fixed firmly

  • Collimators warp under gravity

  • Non-linearity


What should we be testing

What should we be testing?

  • Maybe …

    • acquisition of IRC jig 10cm lat. from iso-centre

    • radius 33cm

    • dual head

      • 180°

      • 102° non-circular orbit

  • Write macro to do analysis (X and Y errors)

  • When you get home try the display A method for Y errors only


Summary 1

Summary 1

  • If you are using Odyssey IRC test you are probably being misled into believing performance is much better than it really is.

  • Philips should supply better documentation.


Summary 2

Summary 2

  • Philips should improve correction:

    • Forte and Axis. (Worst in class).

  • Our measurements indicate:

    • If Philips modified the IRC cal. so that it took mean Y offsets for both heads over 360° and used the means to correct data, then offset errors could be reduced to 2.1 mm (Axis)

    • If Philips derived a variable correction as a function radius and angle: error could be eliminated at COR but linearly increase with radius (to 2.1 mm at 33cm)

    • This would probably meet all aspirations.

  • Further improvement would require gantry re-engineering


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Axis 1

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Axis 2

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

ECam

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Hawkeye

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Forte A

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


Centre of rotation is there a problem in the y dimension

Forte B

X centroids

raw

fitted

Y centroids

raw

mean

X error

Y error


  • Login