Date: 3.7.02 5.9.02
Venue: Lewisham/Pembury
This 2 Headed camera has a flexible head configuration, which can be pre-set for different studies. The two heads are mounted on a C-arm configuration.
Camera FOV is 54 X 40 cm, good for including legs on dynamics for example. There is a small distance from the edge of the detector to the active Field of View (2.5 inches).
The processing computer can be a Vision or an Entegra. (These will be reported seperately).
There is no integrated Acquisition and processing console. Flat screen monitors not standard.
Table swings 90 deg from SPECT to Whole body – SPECT done with long axis of camera, whilst Whole Body takes advantage of the 2048 X 512 acquisition.
Table can be removed completely to allow access to trolleys.
However, there is no motor drive on the table, and it has to be manually pushed into the camera, this could prove a Health and Safety risk with large patients.
The table is reported to be not very comfortable, on inspection the matress is not as soft as our present Diacam. A scinti matress is available.(Possibly just the DuPont one however)
Steel plate on floor for wheels – can put under Lino.
Movements appear smooth and quiet. Heads rotate to give single head access. The gantry is quite open, due to the C -arm. The heads are unable to be moved vertically, which can result in imaging at a very high table height.
There is a handset which controls movements etc. But this is connected by cable to the camera, not infra-red.
Whole Body uses neat distance detector to keep close to body – accurate, it varies with breathing! (“Trace”)Device can be removed. Up to 2.3 m travel of camera – table remains still. Goes down low – 60 cm. Can save half a whole body if interrupted. Anti collision pads on camera faces – fiddly to remove/put on.
Collimator changeCollimator carts do take up some space. The collimators were seen being changed, this appears complex and time-consuming. The operator has to wheel the carts in, and line them up to the camera, there is very little in the way of guides to line them up, some trial and error is needed. The camera is the lowered onto the collimators and locked on. It is important that operators follow the instructions on the screen, a step out of phase could cause further delays. Very crude and time-consuming, certainly a weak point of the system.
Acquisition station looks basic and dated. No clear graphics, it is probably adequate. A user friendly text box tells you what to do, rather verbosely. Its not that impressive, the contrast is very low, it's a touch screen, and the GUI is poor.
P Scope is only available in Black/White.
From time to time it is necessary to “Park” or “home” the system, so it can orientate itself. This involves the heads, gantry and bed performing test movements. This takes several minutes.
Need to check space required – should fit OK.
Reliability – said to be OK, but insufficient information on this.
Conclusion
Unfortunately this appears to be a rather basic system, despite the design of the flexible heads, a little more thought is needed elsewhere, eg no motorised table, crude collimator change.
I did not like the acquisition terminal, although further investigation of this is required.
Our quest for ergonomic efficiency will not be solved by the slow collimator change, manual table movement and parking routine. I would assume the cost of the system to be quite reasonable.
Sept 2002
This report is based on visits to Lewisham and Pembury Hospitals.
It is a personal opinion on the equipment, gained at time of visit. Please report any factual errors.