David Izquierdo-Garcia1, Adam E Hansen2, Stefan Förster3, Didier Benoit2, Sylvia Schachoff3, Sebastian Fürst3, Kevin T Chen4, Daniel B Chonde5, Ciprian Catana6. 1. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Clinical Physiology, Nuclear Medicine, and PET, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. 4. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts; and. 5. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts; and Program in Biophysics, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 6. Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts ccatana@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: We present an approach for head MR-based attenuation correction (AC) based on the Statistical Parametric Mapping 8 (SPM8) software, which combines segmentation- and atlas-based features to provide a robust technique to generate attenuation maps (μ maps) from MR data in integrated PET/MR scanners. METHODS: Coregistered anatomic MR and CT images of 15 glioblastoma subjects were used to generate the templates. The MR images from these subjects were first segmented into 6 tissue classes (gray matter, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid, bone, soft tissue, and air), which were then nonrigidly coregistered using a diffeomorphic approach. A similar procedure was used to coregister the anatomic MR data for a new subject to the template. Finally, the CT-like images obtained by applying the inverse transformations were converted to linear attenuation coefficients to be used for AC of PET data. The method was validated on 16 new subjects with brain tumors (n = 12) or mild cognitive impairment (n = 4) who underwent CT and PET/MR scans. The μ maps and corresponding reconstructed PET images were compared with those obtained using the gold standard CT-based approach and the Dixon-based method available on the Biograph mMR scanner. Relative change (RC) images were generated in each case, and voxel- and region-of-interest-based analyses were performed. RESULTS: The leave-one-out cross-validation analysis of the data from the 15 atlas-generation subjects showed small errors in brain linear attenuation coefficients (RC, 1.38% ± 4.52%) compared with the gold standard. Similar results (RC, 1.86% ± 4.06%) were obtained from the analysis of the atlas-validation datasets. The voxel- and region-of-interest-based analysis of the corresponding reconstructed PET images revealed quantification errors of 3.87% ± 5.0% and 2.74% ± 2.28%, respectively. The Dixon-based method performed substantially worse (the mean RC values were 13.0% ± 10.25% and 9.38% ± 4.97%, respectively). Areas closer to the skull showed the largest improvement. CONCLUSION: We have presented an SPM8-based approach for deriving the head μ map from MR data to be used for PET AC in integrated PET/MR scanners. Its implementation is straightforward and requires only the morphologic data acquired with a single MR sequence. The method is accurate and robust, combining the strengths of both segmentation- and atlas-based approaches while minimizing their drawbacks.
UNLABELLED: We present an approach for head MR-based attenuation correction (AC) based on the Statistical Parametric Mapping 8 (SPM8) software, which combines segmentation- and atlas-based features to provide a robust technique to generate attenuation maps (μ maps) from MR data in integrated PET/MR scanners. METHODS: Coregistered anatomic MR and CT images of 15 glioblastoma subjects were used to generate the templates. The MR images from these subjects were first segmented into 6 tissue classes (gray matter, white matter, cerebrospinal fluid, bone, soft tissue, and air), which were then nonrigidly coregistered using a diffeomorphic approach. A similar procedure was used to coregister the anatomic MR data for a new subject to the template. Finally, the CT-like images obtained by applying the inverse transformations were converted to linear attenuation coefficients to be used for AC of PET data. The method was validated on 16 new subjects with brain tumors (n = 12) or mild cognitive impairment (n = 4) who underwent CT and PET/MR scans. The μ maps and corresponding reconstructed PET images were compared with those obtained using the gold standard CT-based approach and the Dixon-based method available on the Biograph mMR scanner. Relative change (RC) images were generated in each case, and voxel- and region-of-interest-based analyses were performed. RESULTS: The leave-one-out cross-validation analysis of the data from the 15 atlas-generation subjects showed small errors in brain linear attenuation coefficients (RC, 1.38% ± 4.52%) compared with the gold standard. Similar results (RC, 1.86% ± 4.06%) were obtained from the analysis of the atlas-validation datasets. The voxel- and region-of-interest-based analysis of the corresponding reconstructed PET images revealed quantification errors of 3.87% ± 5.0% and 2.74% ± 2.28%, respectively. The Dixon-based method performed substantially worse (the mean RC values were 13.0% ± 10.25% and 9.38% ± 4.97%, respectively). Areas closer to the skull showed the largest improvement. CONCLUSION: We have presented an SPM8-based approach for deriving the head μ map from MR data to be used for PET AC in integrated PET/MR scanners. Its implementation is straightforward and requires only the morphologic data acquired with a single MR sequence. The method is accurate and robust, combining the strengths of both segmentation- and atlas-based approaches while minimizing their drawbacks.
Authors: Thomas Beyer; Markus Weigert; Harald H Quick; Uwe Pietrzyk; Florian Vogt; Christoph Palm; Gerald Antoch; Stefan P Müller; Andreas Bockisch Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ahmadreza Rezaei; Michel Defrise; Girish Bal; Christian Michel; Maurizio Conti; Charles Watson; Johan Nuyts Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2012-08-09 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Johan Nuyts; Girish Bal; Frank Kehren; Matthias Fenchel; Christian Michel; Charles Watson Journal: IEEE Trans Med Imaging Date: 2012-09-21 Impact factor: 10.048
Authors: Anne Larsson; Adam Johansson; Jan Axelsson; Tufve Nyholm; Thomas Asklund; Katrine Riklund; Mikael Karlsson Journal: MAGMA Date: 2012-09-07 Impact factor: 2.310
Authors: Andrei Samarin; Cyrill Burger; Scott D Wollenweber; David W Crook; Irene A Burger; Daniel T Schmid; Gustav K von Schulthess; Felix P Kuhn Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2012-04-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: D L Bailey; B J Pichler; B Gückel; H Barthel; A J Beer; J Bremerich; J Czernin; A Drzezga; C Franzius; V Goh; M Hartenbach; H Iida; A Kjaer; C la Fougère; C N Ladefoged; I Law; K Nikolaou; H H Quick; O Sabri; J Schäfer; M Schäfers; H F Wehrl; T Beyer Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Douglas N Greve; David H Salat; Spencer L Bowen; David Izquierdo-Garcia; Aaron P Schultz; Ciprian Catana; J Alex Becker; Claus Svarer; Gitte M Knudsen; Reisa A Sperling; Keith A Johnson Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Shir Atzil; Alexandra Touroutoglou; Tali Rudy; Stephanie Salcedo; Ruth Feldman; Jacob M Hooker; Bradford C Dickerson; Ciprian Catana; Lisa Feldman Barrett Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-02-13 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Tonghe Wang; Yang Lei; Yabo Fu; Walter J Curran; Tian Liu; Jonathon A Nye; Xiaofeng Yang Journal: Phys Med Date: 2020-07-29 Impact factor: 2.685
Authors: Minhae Kim; Ishtiaq Mawla; Daniel S Albrecht; Roee Admon; Angel Torrado-Carvajal; Courtney Bergan; Ekaterina Protsenko; Poornima Kumar; Robert R Edwards; Atreyi Saha; Vitaly Napadow; Diego A Pizzagalli; Marco L Loggia Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2020-02-15 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Kevin T Chen; David Izquierdo-Garcia; Clare B Poynton; Daniel B Chonde; Ciprian Catana Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2016-08-29 Impact factor: 9.236