Bremsstrahlung imaging from the liver using the Monte Carlo simulation

Introduction: Most beta and gamma radiation radioisotopes used for treatment are not suitable for imaging. The bremsstrahlung images on a conventional gamma camera helped to localize the radionuclide within and outside of the lesion. Secondary scattering of gamma rays of higher energy and bremsstrahlung causes contamination in the energy window and reducing the contrast and resolution of the images and the quantization validation of the images cannot be performed. Therefore, the accuracy of scatter correction methods is of great importance. The method involves the use of energy window, empirically selected broad bremsstrahlung energy to enhance the signal to noise ratio and a wiener restoration filter to compensate for system blur. Materials and Methods: To simulate and validate the system, a water bottle containing Phosphorus-32 (P32) radio was taken. GATE package was used to determine the spectrum of bremsstrahlung radiation from P32 inside the liver and Zubal phantom was used to model a liver. Importantly, simulations were performed in the presence of a collimator without collimator and the collimator function was calculated. Zubal Phantom was also used to model liver imaging. The Wiener filter was used as a resolution adjuster. Results: Despite the small number of electrons reaching the collimator, a considerable spectrum is produced. Collimator function and simulated liver image were calculated. No significant change in resolution was observed after using the Weiner filter. Conclusion: The energy spectrum of the beams was altered after collimation to the collimator. Also, the shape of the energy spectrum was influenced by the type of tissue and size of the patient. The results had shown that planar gamma camera imaging and quantitation of P32 can be done. There is no compelling reason to suggest that the Wiener filter is useful in planning a Plane.

Keywords

Nuclear Medicine

Bremsstrahlung

References

1.
Minarik D, Sjgreen-Gleisner K, Linden O, Wingrdh K, Tennvall J, Strand SE, Ljungberg M. 90Y bremsstrahlung imaging for absorbed-dose assessment in high-dose radioimmunotherapy. J Nucl Med 2010; 51: 1974-1978.
2.
Nayak D, Lahiri S. Application of radioisotopes in the field of nuclear medicine. J Radio Nucl Chem 1999; 242: 423-432.
3.
Kowalsky RJ, Falen SW, Kowalsky R. Radiopharmaceuticals in nuclear pharmacy and nuclear medicine: Forrester Center, WVa; American Pharmacists Association; 2004.
4.
Bardis M, Flux G, Lassmann M, Monsieurs M, Savolainen S, Strand SE. Quantitative imaging for clinical dosimetry. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2006; 569: 467-471.
5.
Parsai EI, Ayyangar KM, Dobelbower RR, Siegel JA. Clinical fusion of three-dimensional images using bremsstrahlung SPECT and CT. J Nucl Med 1997; 38: 319-324.
6.
Cipriani C, Atzei G, Argir G, Boemi S, Shukla. S, Rossi G, et al. Gamma camera imaging of osseous metastatic lesions by strontium-89 bremsstrahlung. Eur J Nucl Med 1997; 24: 1356-1361.
7.
Siegel JA. Quantitative bremsstrahlung SPECT imaging: attenuation-corrected activity determination. J Nucl Med 1994; 35: 1213-1216.
8.
Assi K, Gardin I, Vera P, Buvat I. Validation of the monte carlo simulator GATE for indium-111 imaging. Phys Med Biol 2005; 50: 3113-3125.
9.
Balachandran S, McGuire L, Flanigan S, Shah H, Boyd C. Bremsstrahlung imaging after 32P treatment for residual suprasellar cyst. Int J Nucl Med Biol 1985; 12: 215-221.
10.
Stabin MG, Eckerman KF, Ryman JC, Williams LE. Bremsstrahlung radiation dose in yttrium-90 therapy applications. J Nucl Med 1994; 35: 1377-1380.
11.
Ito S, Kurosawa H, Kasahara H, Teraoka S, Ariga E, Deji S, et al. 90Y bremsstrahlung emission computed tomography using gamma cameras. Ann Nucl Med 2009; 23: 257-267.
12.
Heard S, Flux GD, Guy MJ, Ott RJ, editors. Monte Carlo simulation of 90Y bremsstrahlung imaging. Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec IEEE; 2004.
13.
Fabbri C, Sarti G, Cremonesi M, Ferrari M, Dia AD, Agostini M, et al. Quantitative analysis of 90Y bremsstrahlung SPECT-CT images for application to 3D patient-specific dosimetry. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 2009; 24: 145-154.
14.
Stabin M, Flux G. Internal dosimetry as a tool for radiation protection of the patient in nuclear medicine. Biomed Imaging Interv J 2007; 3: e28.
15.
Grevillot L, Bertrand D, Dessy F, Freud N, Sarrut D. GATE as a GEANT4-based Monte Carlo platform for the evaluation of proton pencil beam scanning treatment plans. Phys Med Biol 2012; 57: 4223-4244.
16.
Amako K, Guatelli S, Ivanchencko V, Maire M, Mascialino B, Murakami K, et al. Geant4 and its validation. Nucl Phys B-Proc Suppl 2006; 150: 44-49.
17.
Maigne L, Perrot Y, Schaart DR, Donnarieix D, Breton V. Comparison of GATE/GEANT4 with EGSnrc and MCNP for electron dose calculations at energies between 15 keV and 20 MeV. Phys Med Biol 2011; 56: 811.
18.
Agostinelli S, Allison J, Amako K, Apostolakis J, Araujo H, Arce P, et al. GEANT4a simulation toolkit. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 2003; 506: 250-303.
19.
Barzegar Ziarani M, Bakhshandeh M, bakhshian-Farsani M, Bakhshandeh E, Shakeri N. Review and performance comparison of lead-free shields and lead shields, in terms of biological effects in nuclear medicine by the comet method. Koomesh 2018; 2: 792-799. (Persian).
20.
Tajik-mansoury MA, Taleshi Ahangari H, Rajabi H, Jadidi M. Evaluation of cellular S-value of auger electrons emitting 111In radionuclide by Geant4 and its comparison with MCNP5 Monte Carlo codes and MIRD published data. Koomesh 2019; 21: 567-575. (Persian).

comments