We have developed a pixellated high energy X-ray detector instrument to be used in a variety of imaging applications. The instrument consists of either a Cadmium Zinc Telluride or Cadmium Telluride (Cd(Zn)Te) detector bump-bonded to a large area ASIC and packaged with a high performance data acquisition system. The 80 by 80 pixels each of 250 μm by 250 μm give better than 1 keV FWHM energy resolution at 59.5 keV and 1.5 keV FWHM at 141 keV, at the same time providing a high speed imaging performance. This system uses a relatively simple wire-bonded interconnection scheme but this is being upgraded to allow multiple modules to be used with very small dead space. The readout system and the novel interconnect technology is described and how the system is performing in several target applications.

/pdf/pixellated-cd-zn-te-high-energy-x-ray-instrument-f21vyffig5.pdf

Pixellated Cd(Zn)Te high-energy X-ray instrument

BACKGROUND Successful brace treatment entails good control of scoliosis with avoidance of surgery. However, achieving curve regression may be an even better radiological result than prevention of curve progression for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Vertebral remodeling may occur with well-fitted braces. Better in-brace curve correction may influence the likelihood of vertebral remodeling and the chance of curve regression. Only a few reports have evaluated curve regression with brace treatment, and the factors associated with these events are unknown. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES (1) What changes in curvature are observed with brace treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? (2) What factors are associated with curve improvement? (3) What factors are associated with curve deterioration? (4) Is curve regression associated with improvements in patient-reported objective outcome scores? METHODS Between September 2008 and December 2013, 666 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis underwent underarm brace treatment and were followed until skeletal maturity at 18 years old. Among these patients, 80 were excluded because of early discontinuation of brace treatment (n = 66) and loss to follow-up (n = 14). Hence, 586 patients were included in this study, with a mean brace-wear duration of 3.8 ± 1.5 years and post-weaning follow-up duration of 2.0 ± 1.1 years. The mean age at baseline was 12.6 ± 1.2 years. Most patients were female (87%, 507 of 586) and up to 53% (267 of 507) of females were post-menarche. Bracing outcomes were based on changes in the Cobb angle measured out of brace. These included curve regression, as indicated by at least a 5° reduction in the Cobb angle, curve progression, as indicated by at least a 5° increase in the Cobb angle, and unchanged, as indicated by a change in the Cobb angle of less than 5°. We studied the pre-brace and supine Cobb angles, curve flexibility (pre-brace Cobb angle - supine Cobb angle / pre-brace Cobb angle x 100%), correction rate (pre-brace Cobb angle - in-brace Cobb angle / pre-brace Cobb angle x 100%), location of apical vertebrae, apical ratio (convex vertebral height/concave vertebral height), change in the major curve Cobb angle, and apical ratio post-bracing. The refined 22-item Scoliosis Research Society questionnaire was used for patient-reported outcomes and is composed of five domains (function, pain, appearance, mental health and satisfaction with treatment). Its minimum clinically important difference, based on a scale from 0 to 5, has been quoted as 0.2 for pain, 0.08 for activity and 0.98 for appearance domains. Mental health has no quoted minimum clinically important difference for the adolescent idiopathic scoliosis population. Satisfaction with treatment is described based on improvement or deterioration in domain scores. Intergroup differences between bracing outcomes were evaluated with the Kruskal Wallis test. Univariate analyses of bracing outcomes were performed with a point-biserial correlation coefficient for continuous variables and Pearson's chi-square test for categorical variables. Multivariate logistic regression models were created for improved and deteriorated outcomes. P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS In all, 17% of patients (98 of 586) had an improved angle and 40% of patients (234 of 586) had curve deterioration. In patients who improved, the mean reduction in the Cobb angle was 9 ± 4°, while in patients who deteriorated, the mean increase in the Cobb angle was 15 ± 9°, and this was maintained at the latest post-brace weaning follow-up. Despite a trend for patients with curve regression to have higher baseline flexibility and correction rate, after controlling for age, Risser staging, radius and ulnar grading, and Sanders staging, we found no clinically important differences with increased correction rate or flexibility. We did find that improvement in the Cobb angle after bracing was associated with reduced apical ratio (odds ratio [OR] 0.84 [95% CI 0.80 to 0.87]; p < 0.001). Curve progression was associated with younger age (OR 0.71 [95% CI 0.55 to 0.91]; p = 0.008), pre-menarche status (OR 2.46 [95% CI 1.31 to 4.62]; p = 0.005), and increased apical ratio (OR 1.24 [95% CI 1.19 to 1.30]; p < 0.001) but no clinically important differences were observed with less flexible curves and reduced correction rate. Improvements in scores of the refined 22-item Scoliosis Research Society domains of function (mean difference on a scale from 0 to 5: 0.2; p = 0.001 versus 0.1; p < 0.001) and pain (mean difference on a scale from 0 to 5: 0.2; p = 0.020 versus 0.0; p = 0.853) were greater in the post-brace improvement group than in the deterioration group and fulfilled the minimum clinically important difference threshold. The appearance domain did not fulfill the minimum clinically important difference. Satisfaction with treatment domain score minimally improved with the curve regression group (mean difference on a scale from 0 to 5: 0.2) but deteriorated in the curve progression group (mean difference on a scale from 0 to 5: -0.4). CONCLUSIONS Curve regression occurs after underarm bracing and is associated with superior patient-reported outcome scores. This possible change in Cobb angle should be explained to patients before and during bracing. Whether this may help improve patients' duration of brace-wear should be addressed in future studies. Patients with well-fitting braces may experience curve improvement and possible vertebral remodeling. Those braced at a younger age and with increased vertebral wedging are more likely to have curve progression. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Level III, therapeutic study.

Does Curve Regression Occur During Underarm Bracing in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

Studies have shown that bracing is an effective treatment for patients with idiopathic scoliosis. According to the current classification, almost all braces fall in the thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) category. Consequently, the generalization of scientific results is either impossible or misleading. This study aims to produce a classification of the brace types.Four scientific societies (SOSORT, SRS, ISPO, and POSNA) invited all their members to be part of the study. Six level 1 experts developed the initial classifications. At a consensus meeting with 26 other experts and societies' officials, thematic analysis and general discussion allowed to define the classification (minimum 80% agreement). The classification was applied to the braces published in the literature and officially approved by the 4 scientific societies and by ESPRM.The classification is based on the following classificatory items: anatomy (CTLSO, TLSO, LSO), rigidity (very rigid, rigid, elastic), primary corrective plane (frontal, sagittal, transverse, frontal & sagittal, frontal & transverse, sagittal & transverse, three-dimensional), construction-valves (monocot, bivalve, multisegmented), construction-closure (dorsal, lateral, ventral), and primary action (bending, detorsion, elongation, movement, push-up, three points). The experts developed a definition for each item and were able to classify the 15 published braces into nine groups.The classification is based on the best current expertise (the lowest level of evidence). Experts recognize that this is the first edition and will change with future understanding and research. The broad application of this classification could have value for brace research, education, clinical practice, and growth in this field. 

/pdf/the-classification-of-scoliosis-braces-developed-by-sosort-3qq2sf8w.pdf

The classification of scoliosis braces developed by SOSORT with SRS, ISPO, and POSNA and approved by ESPRM

Brace effectiveness for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis was controversial until recent studies provided high quality of evidence that bracing can decrease likelihood of progression and need for operative treatment. Very low evidence exists regarding bracing over 40ο and adult degenerative scoliosis. Initial in-brace correction and compliance seem to be the most important predictive factors for successful treatment outcome. However, the amount of correction and adherence to wearing hours have not been established yet. Moderate evidence suggests that thoracic and double curves, and curves over 30ο at an early growth stage have more risk for failure. High and low body mass index scores are also associated with low successful rates. CAD/CAM braces have shown better initial correction and are more comfortable than conventional plaster cast braces. For a curve at high risk of progression, rigid and day-time braces are significantly more effective than soft or night-time braces. No safe conclusion on effectiveness can be drawn while comparing symmetrical and asymmetrical brace designs. The addition of physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises in brace treatment can provide better outcomes and is recommended, when possible. Despite the growing evidence for brace effectiveness, there is still an imperative need for future high methodological quality studies to be conducted.

https://www.dovepress.com/getfile.php?fileID=53199

Bracing In The Treatment Of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Evidence To Date.

CZT detectors are the basic building block of a variety of new SPECT systems. Their modularity allows adapting system architecture to specific applications such as cardiac, breast, brain or small animal imaging. In semiconductors, a high number of electron-hole pairs is produced by a single interaction. This direct conversion process allows better energy and spatial resolutions than usual scintillation detectors based on NaI(Tl). However, it remains often unclear if SPECT imaging can really benefit of that performance gain. We investigate the system performance of a detection module, which is based on 5 mm thick CZT with a segmented anode having a 2.5 mm pitch by simulation and experimentation. This pitch allows an easy assembly of the crystal on the readout board and limits the space occupied by electronics without significantly degrading energy and spatial resolution.

Studying Spatial Resolution of CZT Detectors Using Sub-Pixel Positioning for SPECT

We present a Monte Carlo algorithm for the simulation of charge collection behavior of semiconductor γ -ray detectors. The model takes into account the electrical properties of the detectors, transport properties of the material, trapping induced by impurities, experimental setup characteristics and γ -ray–matter interaction processes. We demonstrate how to include electrostatic repulsion as a correction to diffusion coefficient for Gaussian-shaped charge distribution. Comparison of simulated and measured data for different γ -ray sources for a CdZnTe single-sided charge-sharing strip detector are shown to demonstrate the efficiency of the model even for small electrode-pitch detector simulation.

Simulation of charge collection processes in semiconductor CdZnTe γ-ray detectors

The effectiveness of the SpineCor brace for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Comparison with the Boston brace

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

Mathieu Benoit

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Simulation of charge collection processes in semiconductor CdZnTe γ-ray detectors

The effectiveness of the SpineCor brace for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Comparison with the Boston brace