[ RadSafe ] SPECT/CT survey

[Jaro]

I'm confused -- isn't "SPECT/CT" redundant ? .....there's already a "CT" at
the end of "SPECT"

The reason I thought there's much more PET than SPECT, is because it appears
that that's all the hospitals (in Canada anyway) are buying these days --
see graph at
http://www.cns-snc.ca/branches/quebec/slowpoke/accelerateurs_Canada_2003.jpg

.....its part of my CNS-Quebec web page presenting some basics of PET and
SPECT (in French only) at
http://www.cns-snc.ca/branches/quebec/slowpoke/CHUS_forensique.html
Included at the bottom of the page are four animated 3D pictures obtained
using both PET and SPECT (you have to click on the thumbnails to see them).

Thnx

 Jaro
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Smart [mailto:r.smart at unsw.edu.au]
Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 6:49 PM
To: Jaro; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] SPECT/CT survey


Dear Jaro,

I'm not certain what gave you the impression that there were more PET units
than SPECT.  Nearly every gamma camera that has been sold in the last 20
years has had SPECT capabilities.  PET has really only entered  main-stream
clinical utility in the last 5 - 10 years, while SPECT has been used
routinely since the 1970s.

SPECT units vastly outnumber PET scanners.

What has changed is the advent of SPECT/CT scanners.  Until recently GE was
the only major producer of a combined scanner. In 2004, other major vendors,
such as Siemens and Philips, introduced integrated SPECT/CT scanners.
PET/CT has been used clinically for a longer period.

Richard

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jaro" <jaro-10kbq at sympatico.ca>
To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:22 AM
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] SPECT/CT survey


> That's very interesting John.
> Somehow, I was under the impression that there were many more PET machines
> in service, than SPECT --- reason being that PETs don't need nuke reactors
> for support, and as we all know, the latter are rapidly going out of style
> (or out of "political correctness").
> Would you please explain, if possible, why your establishment's nuke
> medicine dep't seems to be bucking the trend ? ....or is the appearance of
> such a trend simply fictitious ?
>
> Thanks again.
>
>  Jaro
>
>  Jaro Franta, P.Eng.
> Tel.: (514) 875-3444
> Montréal, Québec
> frantaj at aecl.ca
> web master, CNS Québec branch:
> http://www.cns-snc.ca/branches/quebec/quebec.html
>
> <><><><><><><><><><><>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
Behalf
> Of John Jacobus
> Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 12:21 PM
> To: molex77 at yahoo.com; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] SPECT/CT survey
>
>
> We currently have a single PET/CT scanner, and four
> SPECT cameras.  All of our SPECT images are fused to
> separate CT scanners.
> <SNIP>
>
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing list
> radsafe at radlab.nl
>
> For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and other settings visit:
> http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe


--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/2005