In this paper the evaluation of tomographic ISOCAM Park II gamma camera parameters was performed using the Monte Carlo code SIMIND. The parameters uniformity, resolution and contrast were evaluated by Jaszczak phantom simulation. In addition the qualitative assessment of the center of rotation was performed. The results of the simulation are compared and evaluated against the specifications of the manufacturer of the gamma camera and taking into account the National Protocol for Quality Control of Nuclear Medicine Instruments of the Cuban Medical Equipment Control Center. A computational Jaszczak phantom model with three different distributions of activity was obtained. They can be used to perform studies with gamma cameras

En este trabajo se realizó la evaluación de parámetros tomográficos de la cámara gamma Park Isocam II mediante el código Monte Carlo SIMIND. Los parámetros uniformidad, resolución y contraste se evaluaron a través de la simulación del maniquí de Jaszczak. Además, se realizó la evaluación cualitativa del centro de rotación. Los resultados obtenidos en la simulación se evaluaron tomando como referencia las especificaciones del fabricante de la cámara gamma y teniendo en cuenta el Protocolo Nacional de Control de Calidad de Instrumentos de Medicina Nuclear del Centro de Control de Equipos Médicos en Cuba. Se obtuvo un modelo computacional del maniquí de Jaszczak con tres distribuciones diferentes de actividad que se puede usar para realizar estudios con cámaras gamma

In this work, a risk analysis for working with an analyzer for gamma cameras diagnostic was made. The method employed is based on determining the Hazard Rating Number (HRN). The results showed that the risks with higher value of HRN are electrocution with 100 and touch source container with hands with 75. These risks were classified as "Very High" and "High" respectively. The following risks were classified as "Important": Fall of the source container (HRN = 25), high dose of the sample in the container (HRN = 20) and fracture of glass detector (HRN = 30). The wrong shielding of the source container (HRN= 10) is a risk that was classified as "Low". Safety rules for use of the system are indicated. An action plan for risk management is also presented

Se realizó un estudio de los riesgos asociados al trabajo con un analizador para el diagnóstico de cámaras gamma. Para ello se utilizó el método Hazard Rating Number, el cual se basa en la determinación del número de riesgo. Los resultados mostraron que los riesgos con mayor HRN son por electrocución con un valor de 100 y por tocar el contenedor de la fuente con las manos, con 75. Estos riesgos se clasificaron como “Muy Alto” y “Alto” respectivamente. Como “Importante” se clasificaron los siguientes riesgos: caída del contenedor de la fuente (HRN = 25), dosis elevada de la muestra en el contenedor (HRN = 20) y fractura del cristal del detector (HRN = 30). El mal blindaje del contenedor de la fuente (HRN = 10) es un riesgo que se clasificó como “Bajo”. Se indican reglas de seguridad para uso del sistema. También se presenta un plan de acción para la gestión de los riesgos

INTRODUCTION: This paper presents a simulation for evaluation of the scattered radiation components produced in a gamma camera PARK using Monte Carlo code SIMIND. It simulates a whole body study with MDP (Methylene Diphosphonate) radiopharmaceutical based on Zubal anthropomorphic phantom, with some spinal lesions. METHODS: The simulation was done by comparing 3 configurations for the detected photons. The corresponding energy spectra were obtained using Low Energy High Resolution collimator. The parameters related with the interactions and the fraction of events in the energy window, the simulated events of the spectrum and scatter events were calculated. RESULTS: The simulation confirmed that the images without influence of scattering events have a higher number of valid recorded events and it improved the statistical quality of them. A comparison among different collimators was made. The parameters and detector energy spectrum were calculated for each simulation configuration with these collimators using 99mTc. CONCLUSION: The simulation corroborated that LEHS collimator has higher sensitivity and HEHR collimator has lower sensitivity when they are used with low energy photons.