Literature DB >> 21248391

Bias in iterative reconstruction of low-statistics PET data: benefits of a resolution model.

M D Walker1, M-C Asselin, P J Julyan, M Feldmann, P S Talbot, T Jones, J C Matthews.   

Abstract

Iterative image reconstruction methods such as ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) are widely used in PET. Reconstructions via OSEM are however reported to be biased for low-count data. We investigated this and considered the impact for dynamic PET. Patient listmode data were acquired in [(11)C]DASB and [(15)O]H(2)O scans on the HRRT brain PET scanner. These data were subsampled to create many independent, low-count replicates. The data were reconstructed and the images from low-count data were compared to the high-count originals (from the same reconstruction method). This comparison enabled low-statistics bias to be calculated for the given reconstruction, as a function of the noise-equivalent counts (NEC). Two iterative reconstruction methods were tested, one with and one without an image-based resolution model (RM). Significant bias was observed when reconstructing data of low statistical quality, for both subsampled human and simulated data. For human data, this bias was substantially reduced by including a RM. For [(11)C]DASB the low-statistics bias in the caudate head at 1.7 M NEC (approx. 30 s) was -5.5% and -13% with and without RM, respectively. We predicted biases in the binding potential of -4% and -10%. For quantification of cerebral blood flow for the whole-brain grey- or white-matter, using [(15)O]H(2)O and the PET autoradiographic method, a low-statistics bias of <2.5% and <4% was predicted for reconstruction with and without the RM. The use of a resolution model reduces low-statistics bias and can hence be beneficial for quantitative dynamic PET.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21248391     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/56/4/004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  34 in total

Review 1.  Clinical use of quantitative cardiac perfusion PET: rationale, modalities and possible indications. Position paper of the Cardiovascular Committee of the European Association of Nuclear Medicine (EANM).

Authors:  Roberto Sciagrà; Alessandro Passeri; Jan Bucerius; Hein J Verberne; Riemer H J A Slart; Oliver Lindner; Alessia Gimelli; Fabien Hyafil; Denis Agostini; Christopher Übleis; Marcus Hacker
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2016-02-05       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 2.  Precision and accuracy of clinical quantification of myocardial blood flow by dynamic PET: A technical perspective.

Authors:  Jonathan B Moody; Benjamin C Lee; James R Corbett; Edward P Ficaro; Venkatesh L Murthy
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Fast GPU-based computation of spatial multigrid multiframe LMEM for PET.

Authors:  Moulay Ali Nassiri; Jean-François Carrier; Philippe Després
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  Evaluation of image reconstruction algorithms encompassing Time-Of-Flight and Point Spread Function modelling for quantitative cardiac PET: phantom studies.

Authors:  L Presotto; L Gianolli; M C Gilardi; V Bettinardi
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 5.952

5.  The potential for PET-guided revascularization of coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Matthieu Pelletier-Galarneau; Terrence D Ruddy
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Reproducibility of striatal and thalamic dopamine D2 receptor binding using [11C]raclopride with high-resolution positron emission tomography.

Authors:  Kati Alakurtti; Sargo Aalto; Jarkko J Johansson; Kjell Någren; Terhi Tuokkola; Vesa Oikonen; Matti Laine; Juha O Rinne
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2010-05-05       Impact factor: 6.200

7.  Comparison of HRRT and HR+ scanners for quantitative (R)-[11C]verapamil, [11C]raclopride and [11C]flumazenil brain studies.

Authors:  Floris H P van Velden; Syahir M Mansor; Daniëlle M E van Assema; Bart N M van Berckel; Femke E Froklage; Shaonan Wang; Robert C Schuit; Marie-Claude Asselin; Adriaan A Lammertsma; Ronald Boellaard; Marc C Huisman
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.488

8.  Commentary: an eye on PET quantification.

Authors:  Matthew D Walker; Vesna Sossi
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 3.488

9.  Effect of time-of-flight and point spread function modeling on detectability of myocardial defects in PET.

Authors:  Joshua Schaefferkoetter; Jinsong Ouyang; Yothin Rakvongthai; Carmela Nappi; Georges El Fakhri
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  The effect of time-of-flight and point spread function modeling on 82Rb myocardial perfusion imaging of obese patients.

Authors:  Paul K R Dasari; Judson P Jones; Michael E Casey; Yuanyuan Liang; Vasken Dilsizian; Mark F Smith
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 5.952

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.