Literature DB >> 27812222

Image-based Modeling of PSF Deformation with Application to Limited Angle PET Data.

Samuel Matej1, Yusheng Li1, Joseph Panetta1, Joel S Karp1, Suleman Surti1.   

Abstract

The point-spread-functions (PSFs) of reconstructed images can be deformed due to detector effects such as resolution blurring and parallax error, data acquisition geometry such as insufficient sampling or limited angular coverage in dual-panel PET systems, or reconstruction imperfections/simplifications. PSF deformation decreases quantitative accuracy and its spatial variation lowers consistency of lesion uptake measurement across the imaging field-of-view (FOV). This can be a significant problem with dual panel PET systems even when using TOF data and image reconstruction models of the detector and data acquisition process. To correct for the spatially variant reconstructed PSF distortions we propose to use an image-based resolution model (IRM) that includes such image PSF deformation effects. Originally the IRM was mostly used for approximating data resolution effects of standard PET systems with full angular coverage in a computationally efficient way, but recently it was also used to mitigate effects of simplified geometric projectors. Our work goes beyond this by including into the IRM reconstruction imperfections caused by combination of the limited angle, parallax errors, and any other (residual) deformation effects and testing it for challenging dual panel data with strongly asymmetric and variable PSF deformations. We applied and tested these concepts using simulated data based on our design for a dedicated breast imaging geometry (B-PET) consisting of dual-panel, time-of-flight (TOF) detectors. We compared two image-based resolution models; i) a simple spatially invariant approximation to PSF deformation, which captures only the general PSF shape through an elongated 3D Gaussian function, and ii) a spatially variant model using a Gaussian mixture model (GMM) to more accurately capture the asymmetric PSF shape in images reconstructed from data acquired with the B-PET scanner geometry. Results demonstrate that while both IRMs decrease the overall uptake bias in the reconstructed image, the second one with the spatially variant and accurate PSF shape model is also able to ameliorate the spatially variant deformation effects to provide consistent uptake results independent of the lesion location within the FOV.

Entities:  

Keywords:  B-PET; Reconstruction PSF deformation; TOF DIRECT reconstruction; dedicated breast imaging; histo-images; image-based resolution modeling; limited angle data; parallax errors

Year:  2016        PMID: 27812222      PMCID: PMC5087917          DOI: 10.1109/TNS.2016.2607019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci        ISSN: 0018-9499            Impact factor:   1.679


  22 in total

1.  Non-Gaussian space-variant resolution modelling for list-mode reconstruction.

Authors:  C Cloquet; F C Sureau; M Defrise; G Van Simaeys; N Trotta; S Goldman
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Single scan parameterization of space-variant point spread functions in image space via a printed array: the impact for two PET/CT scanners.

Authors:  F A Kotasidis; J C Matthews; G I Angelis; P J Noonan; A Jackson; P Price; W R Lionheart; A J Reader
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  GPU-Accelerated Forward and Back-Projections with Spatially Varying Kernels for 3D DIRECT TOF PET Reconstruction.

Authors:  S Ha; S Matej; M Ispiryan; K Mueller
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 1.679

4.  Practical considerations for image-based PSF and blobs reconstruction in PET.

Authors:  Simon Stute; Claude Comtat
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Design Optimization of a TOF, Breast PET Scanner.

Authors:  Eunsin Lee; Matthew E Werner; Joel S Karp; Suleman Surti
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 1.679

6.  Efficient fully 3D list-mode TOF PET image reconstruction using a factorized system matrix with an image domain resolution model.

Authors:  Jian Zhou; Jinyi Qi
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Diagnostic accuracy of digital mammography in patients with dense breasts who underwent problem-solving mammography: effects of image processing and lesion type.

Authors:  Elodia B Cole; Etta D Pisano; Emily O Kistner; Keith E Muller; Marylee E Brown; Stephen A Feig; Roberta A Jong; Andrew D A Maidment; Melinda J Staiger; Cherie M Kuzmiak; Rita I Freimanis; Nadine Lesko; Eric L Rosen; Ruth Walsh; Margaret Williford; M Patricia Braeuning
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Analytic TOF PET reconstruction algorithm within DIRECT data partitioning framework.

Authors:  Samuel Matej; Margaret E Daube-Witherspoon; Joel S Karp
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  PET-based estradiol challenge as a predictive biomarker of response to endocrine therapy in women with estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Farrokh Dehdashti; Joanne E Mortimer; Kathryn Trinkaus; Michael J Naughton; Matthew Ellis; John A Katzenellenbogen; Michael J Welch; Barry A Siegel
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2008-03-09       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Feasibility study of FDG PET as an indicator of early response to aromatase inhibitors and trastuzumab in a heterogeneous group of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Brenda F Kurland; Vijayakrishna K Gadi; Jennifer M Specht; Kimberly H Allison; Robert B Livingston; Eve T Rodler; Lanell M Peterson; Erin K Schubert; Xiaoyu Chai; David A Mankoff; Hannah M Linden
Journal:  EJNMMI Res       Date:  2012-06-25       Impact factor: 3.138

View more
  5 in total

1.  Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of sequential PET/MRI using a newly developed mobile PET system for brain imaging.

Authors:  Mizue Suzuki; Yasutaka Fushimi; Tomohisa Okada; Takuya Hinoda; Ryusuke Nakamoto; Yoshiki Arakawa; Nobukatsu Sawamoto; Kaori Togashi; Yuji Nakamoto
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2021-02-28       Impact factor: 2.374

2.  Roadmap toward the 10 ps time-of-flight PET challenge.

Authors:  Paul Lecoq; Christian Morel; John O Prior; Dimitris Visvikis; Stefan Gundacker; Etiennette Auffray; Peter Križan; Rosana Martinez Turtos; Dominique Thers; Edoardo Charbon; Joao Varela; Christophe de La Taille; Angelo Rivetti; Dominique Breton; Jean-François Pratte; Johan Nuyts; Suleman Surti; Stefaan Vandenberghe; Paul Marsden; Katia Parodi; Jose Maria Benlloch; Mathieu Benoit
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Evaluating attenuation correction strategies in a dedicated, single-gantry breast PET-tomosynthesis scanner.

Authors:  Srilalan Krishnamoorthy; Trevor Vent; Bruno Barufaldi; Andrew D A Maidment; Joel S Karp; Suleman Surti
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-12-23       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Penalized maximum-likelihood reconstruction for improving limited-angle artifacts in a dedicated head and neck PET system.

Authors:  Hengquan Zhang; Yuli Wang; Jinyi Qi; Shiva Abbaszadeh
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2020-08-21       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Design and system evaluation of a dual-panel portable PET (DP-PET).

Authors:  Tianyi Zeng; Jiaxu Zheng; Xinyuan Xia; Xin Chen; Beien Wang; Shuangyue Zhang; Adam Chandler; Tuoyu Cao; Lingzhi Hu; Qun Chen; Xu Chu
Journal:  EJNMMI Phys       Date:  2021-06-12
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.