Question 1: Compared to conventional photo-multiplier PET systems, spatial resolution of the SiPM digital photon counting PET system is least affected by |
Reference: | WW Moses. Fundamental Limits of Spatial Resolution in PET. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A. 2011 Aug 21; 648 Supplement 1: S236–S240
Jun Zhang, Michael V Knopp etc. Effect of next generation SiPM digital photon counting PET technology on effective system spatial resolution. SNMMI 2017 June 13; Denver, USA
|
Choice A: | Crystal size |
Choice B: | Positron Range |
Choice C: | Noncollinearity / Acollinearity |
Choice D: | Localization decoding |
Question 2: For a 48cm diameter object, an estimated sensitivity gain and SNR improvement of the digital photon counting TOF PET (320ps, 4.8cm uncertainty) compared to nonTOF PET are about: |
Reference: | Karp JS. Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME and Muehllehner G. Advances in Time-Of-Flight PET. Phys Med, 32(1): 12-22.
Budinger TF. Time-of-Flight Positron Emission Tomography - Status Relative to Conventional PET. J Nucl Med. 1983;24(1):73–76.
|
Choice A: | 5.0 and 5.0 |
Choice B: | 10.0 and 10.0 |
Choice C: | 10.0 and 3.2 |
Choice D: | 10.0 and 5.0 |
Question 3: The timing resolution on the digital PET/CT scanners from GE is in the range of: |
Reference: | Grant AM, Deller TW, Khalighi MM, Maramraju SH, Delso G, Levin CS. NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system. Med Phys. 2016 May;43(5):2334. |
Choice A: | 250-350 ps |
Choice B: | 350-450 ps |
Choice C: | 450-550 ps |
Choice D: | Depends on the number of block rings. |
Question 4: The sensitivity of digital versus conventional GE PET/CT scanners that have the same number of detector rings: |
Reference: | Reynés-Llompart G, Gámez-Cenzano C, Romero-Zayas I, Rodríguez-Bel L, Vercher-Conejero JL, Martí-Climent JM. Performance Characteristics of the Whole-Body Discovery IQ PET/CT System. J Nucl Med. 2017 Jul;58(7):1155-1161.
Grant AM, Deller TW, Khalighi MM, Maramraju SH, Delso G, Levin CS. NEMA NU 2-2012 performance studies for the SiPM-based ToF-PET component of the GE SIGNA PET/MR system. Med Phys. 2016 May;43(5):2334.
|
Choice A: | Is higher for digital compared to conventional detectors systems. |
Choice B: | Is lower for digital compared to conventional detector systems. |
Choice C: | Is about the same for digital compared to conventional detector systems. |
Choice D: | Is independent of the detector system. |
Question 5: Why is LSO or LYSO commonly used as a detector material in PET/CT scanners, rather than NaI(Tl), as commonly used in SPECT? |
Reference: | Vandenberghe et al. Time-of-flight PET: a review of different benefits and recent developments in time-of-flight PET. Euro J Nucl Med, 3: Dec 2015. |
Choice A: | The energy resolution is better at 511 keV to improve event characterization. |
Choice B: | The lower timing resolution enables TOF imaging. |
Choice C: | The detector can be used for PET as well as CT detectors, thereby enabling PET/CT scanners. |
Choice D: | It is less a less expensive scintillation material. |
Question 6: Improved time-of-flight resolution primarily leads to which of the following? |
Reference: | Surti S. Update on Time-of-Flight PET Imaging. J Nucl Med, 56(1): 98-105, Jan 2015. |
Choice A: | Improved spatial resolution |
Choice B: | Increased scan counts |
Choice C: | Improved image signal-to-noise |
Choice D: | All of the above |