Guidelines for the Selection of Scintillators for Indirect Photon-Counting X-ray Detectors

Review (2025)
Author(s)

J.J. van Blaaderen (TU Delft - RST/Luminescence Materials)

Casper van Aarle (TU Delft - RST/Luminescence Materials)

David Leibold (TU Delft - RST/Medical Physics & Technology)

P. Dorenbos (TU Delft - RST/Luminescence Materials)

Dennis R. Schaart (HollandPTC, TU Delft - RST/Medical Physics & Technology)

Research Group
RST/Luminescence Materials
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.4c03437
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2025
Language
English
Research Group
RST/Luminescence Materials
Issue number
5
Volume number
37
Pages (from-to)
1716-1740
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

X-ray photon-counting detectors (PCDs) are a rapidly developing technology. Current PCDs used in medical imaging are based on CdTe, CZT, or Si semiconductor detectors, which directly convert X-ray photons into electrical pulses. An alternative approach is to combine ultrafast scintillators with silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs). Here, an overview is presented of different classes of scintillators, with the aim of assessing their potential application in scintillator-SiPM based indirect X-ray PCDs. To this end, three figures of merit (FOMs) are defined: the pulse intensity, the pulse duration, and the pulse quality. These FOMs quantify how characteristics such as light yield, pulse shape, and energy resolution affect the suitability of scintillators for application in indirect PCDs. These FOMs are based on emissive characteristics; a fourth FOM (ρZeff3.5) is used to also take stopping power into account. Other important properties for the selection process include low self-absorption, low after-glow, possibility to produce sub-mm pitch pixel arrays, and cost-effectiveness. It is shown that material classes with promising emission properties are Ce3+- or Pr3+-doped materials, near band gap exciton emitters, plastics, and core-valence materials. Possible shortcomings of each of these groups, e.g., suboptimal emission wavelength, nonproportionality, and density, are discussed. Additionally, the engineering approach of quenching the scintillator emission, resulting in a targeted shortening of the decay time, and the possibility of codoping are explored. When selecting and/or engineering a material, it is important to consider not only the characteristics of the scintillator but also relevant SiPM properties, such as recharge time and photodetection efficiency.