1 / 19

Use of compact segmented Photodetectors : APD, MAPMT, MCPPMT ? Front-end Electronic

hilda-wilkins
Download Presentation

Use of compact segmented Photodetectors : APD, MAPMT, MCPPMT ? Front-end Electronic

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INNOTEP ProjectUsing HEP technologies to improve TEP imaging: Development of innovative schemes for front-end electronic, readout and DAQ architecture Check of HEP R&D (LHC, ILC, ..) for medical imaging instrumentation To go beyond the state of art independently of the industry To federate French labs effort in the domain of intrumentation applied to TEP imaging Picosecond Lyon

  2. INNOTEP project covers following R&D domains where techniques could be transfered to medical imaging • Use of compact segmented Photodetectors: APD, MAPMT, MCPPMT ? • Front-end Electronic • Fast, low noise,low power preamp • Fast Sampling ADCs • Signal Filtering • Optimum filtering for pulse’s time and amplitude estimation • Signal analysis • Read-Out/DAQ • Pipeline and parallel read-out, • Use of high bandwith system (microTCA and ATCA) for trigger and on-line treatment Picosecond Lyon

  3. How to improve performances of clinical TEP One exemple = Use of Time of Flight (TOF)  Philips, Gemini TF™, Siemens  Reduction of backgrounds  Improvment of image quality  Decrease time of acquisition PET scanner LYSO : 4 x 4 x 22 mm3 28,338 cristaux, 420 PMTs cristal gap: 0.75 µm 2  = 4 ns couronne 70-cm , 18-cm FOV CT scanner Brilliance™ 16 or 64 slice TruFlight™∆t ~ 550 ps GEMINI TF™, Philips Picosecond Lyon

  4. Advantage of TOF Contrast improvment for detection of small structures in background J. Karp, University of Pennsylvania Picosecond Lyon

  5. Advantage of TOF CT Non-TOF CT/TEP TOF Dose injected=9.8 mCi J. Karp, University of Pennsylvania Picosecond Lyon

  6. Second ApplicationNovel Imaging Systems for in vivo Monitoringand Quality Control duringTumour Ion Beam Therapy (proton, carbon) Advantages of hadrontherapy for localized treatment of tumors :  More localized energy deposition in target due to the Bragg peak  Better biological efficiency of hadrons compared to photons Picosecond Lyon

  7. Many hadrontherapy centers planned worldwide: • Protons : • Carbon : GSI, Heidelberg, CNAO, ETOILE, Medaustron…. Hadrontherapy Treatement Protocol : Decomposition of the volume to be treated in voxels  Maximum Energy in each voxel using Bragg peak  Adjustement of the beam in energy and position to locate the Bragg peak in the voxel Picosecond Lyon

  8. Physics 15O, 14O, 13N, 11C … 11C, 10C 12C: E = 212 AMeV Target: PMMA 16O: E = 250 AMeV Target: PMMA 3He: E = 130 AMeV Target: PMMA 7Li: E = 129 AMeV Target: PMMA 1H: E = 110 MeV Target: PMMA Arbitrary units Arbitrary units 15O, 11C, 13N ... 15O, 11C, 13N ... 15O, 11C, 13N ... 15O, 11C, 13N ... Penetration depth / mm Penetration depth / mm Peripheral nucleus-nucleus-collisions, nuclear reactions Z 6 Z< 6 Projectile fragments Target fragments Target fragments Picosecond Lyon

  9. What do we have?  In-beam PET Rationale Tomography 3D Non invasive Highly penetrable signal X- or g-rays • Signal with: • well defined energy • spatial correlation • time correlation • time delay In situ Separation of the signal from the therapeutic irradiation Real time Time efficient High detection efficiency ? Annihilationg-rays, Positron Emitters 11C 11B + e+ + ne ? Proportional to dose T1/2 Eg = 511 keV PET Dt = 0 180 deg Picosecond Lyon

  10. g1 12C g2 In-beam PET and Off beam PET Off-beam PET: 1H-therapy at MGH Boston In-beam PET: 12C-therapy at GSI Darmstadt Picosecond Lyon

  11. PET data, list mode: {K1, K2, S}(t) Accelerator: Synchrotron d 60 m Particle beam: pulsed T  5 s, t≤ 2 s Irradiation-time course: {E, I, d}(t) t t 1 S(t) 0 T Time In-beam PET Clinical implementation at GSI Picosecond Lyon

  12. Extraction A2 B2 P Main experimental Constraints • Presence of a large background noise comming mainly from the beambut also : • large rate of high energy prompt gammas from nuclear desexcitation, as well of neutrons • large rate of randoms At GSI  : acquisition out of beam delivery period in correlation with in beam detector But low « true coincidence» statistic to recover dose monitoring Pause : P Out of mbunch: A2 In mbunch: B2 Picosecond Lyon

  13. Pause : P Out of mbunch: A2 In mbunch: B2 Picosecond Lyon

  14. Treatment plan: dose distribution b+-activity: prediction b+-activity: measurement Clinical implementation Ion range verification Picosecond Lyon

  15. In-beam PET Advantages  PET allows for a - beam delivery independent, - simultaneous or close to therapy (in-beam, offline, resp.), - non-invasive control of tumour irradiations by means of ion beams  An in-vivo measurement of the ion range  The validation of the physical model of the treatment planning Picosecond Lyon

  16. In-beam PET Advantages (II)  The evaluation of the whole physical process of the treatment from planning to the dose application - new ion species - new components, algorithms - high precision irradiations  The detection and estimation of unpredictable deviations between planned and actually applied dose distributions due to - mispositioning - anatomical changes - mistakes and incidents Picosecond Lyon

  17. The ENVISION Project (European Novel imaging systems for in vivo monitoring and quality control during tumour ion beam) Upcoming FP7 callHEALTH-2008-1.2-4 The focus should be to developnovel imaging instruments, methods and tools formonitoring,in vivoand preferably inreal time, the3-dimensionaldistribution of the radiation dose effectively delivered within the patient during ion beam therapy of cancer. The ions should beprotons or heavier ions. The system should typically be able toquantify the radiation dose delivered, todeterminethe agreement between the planned target volumeand the actually irradiated volume, and fordecreasing localisation uncertaintiesbetween planned and effective positions (e.g. of tissues or organs), and between planned and effective dose distribution during irradiation. It should aim at improving quality assurance, increasing target site (tumour) to normal tissue dose ratio and better sparing normal tissue. Picosecond Lyon

  18. What do we need? WP1: Time-of-flight in-beam PET • Aim: Remove the influence of limited angle tomographic sampling to • quantitative imaging • Subtask 1.1.: Development of a demonstrator of an in-beam TOF positron • camera: • ▪2t < 200 ps  the more the time resolution, the faster and efficient dose reconstruction • ▪hsingles > 50 % • ▪ Dx < 5 mm •  detector technology •  DAQ • Subtask 1.2.: Tomographic reconstruction and prediction of measured • activity distributions from treatment planning •  real-time TOF reconstruction •  simulation TP  TOF IBPET Picosecond Lyon

  19. Main Partners involved in ENVISION project INFN , TERA Project , CERN, IN2P3 , GSI , Heidelberg, Louvain, Birmingham, Oxford, Valencia IBA, OncoRay, Icx, Siemens Picosecond Lyon

More Related