Joshua Schaefferkoetter1, Jinsong Ouyang2, Yothin Rakvongthai2, Carmela Nappi3, Georges El Fakhri2. 1. A*STAR-NUS Clinical Imaging and Research Centre (CIRC), Singapore 117599, Singapore. 2. Center for Advanced Medical Imaging Sciences, Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02114 and Radiology Department, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115. 3. Radiology Department, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115 Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, Naples 80131, Italy; and SDN Foundation, Institute of Diagnostic and Nuclear Development, Naples 80142, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A study was designed to investigate the impact of time-of-flight (TOF) and point spread function (PSF) modeling on the detectability of myocardial defects. METHODS: Clinical FDG-PET data were used to generate populations of defect-present and defect-absent images. Defects were incorporated at three contrast levels, and images were reconstructed by ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) iterative methods including ordinary Poisson, alone and with PSF, TOF, and PSF+TOF. Channelized Hotelling observer signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was the surrogate for human observer performance. RESULTS: For three iterations, 12 subsets, and no postreconstruction smoothing, TOF improved overall defect detection SNR by 8.6% as compared to its non-TOF counterpart for all the defect contrasts. Due to the slow convergence of PSF reconstruction, PSF yielded 4.4% less SNR than non-PSF. For reconstruction parameters (iteration number and postreconstruction smoothing kernel size) optimizing observer SNR, PSF showed larger improvement for faint defects. The combination of TOF and PSF improved mean detection SNR as compared to non-TOF and non-PSF counterparts by 3.0% and 3.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For typical reconstruction protocol used in clinical practice, i.e., less than five iterations, TOF improved defect detectability. In contrast, PSF generally yielded less detectability. For large number of iterations, TOF+PSF yields the best observer performance.
PURPOSE: A study was designed to investigate the impact of time-of-flight (TOF) and point spread function (PSF) modeling on the detectability of myocardial defects. METHODS: Clinical FDG-PET data were used to generate populations of defect-present and defect-absent images. Defects were incorporated at three contrast levels, and images were reconstructed by ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) iterative methods including ordinary Poisson, alone and with PSF, TOF, and PSF+TOF. Channelized Hotelling observer signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was the surrogate for human observer performance. RESULTS: For three iterations, 12 subsets, and no postreconstruction smoothing, TOF improved overall defect detection SNR by 8.6% as compared to its non-TOF counterpart for all the defect contrasts. Due to the slow convergence of PSF reconstruction, PSF yielded 4.4% less SNR than non-PSF. For reconstruction parameters (iteration number and postreconstruction smoothing kernel size) optimizing observer SNR, PSF showed larger improvement for faint defects. The combination of TOF and PSF improved mean detection SNR as compared to non-TOF and non-PSF counterparts by 3.0% and 3.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For typical reconstruction protocol used in clinical practice, i.e., less than five iterations, TOF improved defect detectability. In contrast, PSF generally yielded less detectability. For large number of iterations, TOF+PSF yields the best observer performance.
Authors: Maurizio Conti; Bernard Bendriem; Mike Casey; Mu Chen; Frank Kehren; Christian Michel; Vladimir Panin Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2005-09-13 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Cristina Lois; Bjoern W Jakoby; Misty J Long; Karl F Hubner; David W Barker; Michael E Casey; Maurizio Conti; Vladimir Y Panin; Dan J Kadrmas; David W Townsend Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2010-01-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Dan J Kadrmas; Michael E Casey; Noel F Black; James J Hamill; Vladimir Y Panin; Maurizio Conti Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2008-10-03 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Dan J Kadrmas; Michael E Casey; Maurizio Conti; Bjoern W Jakoby; Cristina Lois; David W Townsend Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-07-17 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Georges El Fakhri; Paula A Santos; Ramsey D Badawi; Clay H Holdsworth; Annick D Van Den Abbeele; Marie Foley Kijewski Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2007-11-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Riemer H J A Slart; Andor W J M Glaudemans; Olivier Gheysens; Mark Lubberink; Tanja Kero; Marc R Dweck; Gilbert Habib; Oliver Gaemperli; Antti Saraste; Alessia Gimelli; Panagiotis Georgoulias; Hein J Verberne; Jan Bucerius; Christoph Rischpler; Fabien Hyafil; Paola A Erba Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2020-10-27 Impact factor: 9.236