Martin Lyngby Lassen1,2, Thomas Beyer3, Alexander Berger3, Dietrich Beitzke4, Sazan Rasul5, Florian Büther6, Marcus Hacker5, Jacobo Cal-González3. 1. QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. MartinLyngby.Lassen@cshs.org. 2. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine program, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. MartinLyngby.Lassen@cshs.org. 3. QIMP Team, Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 4. Division of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 5. Division of Nuclear Medicine, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Image-guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. 6. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Respiratory patient motion causes blurring of the PET images that may impact accurate quantification of perfusion and infarction extents in PET myocardial viability studies. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of correcting for respiratory motion directly in the PET-listmode data prior to image reconstruction using a data-driven, projection-based, respiratory motion compensation (DPR-MoCo) technique. METHODS: The DPR-MoCo method was validated using simulations of a XCAT phantom (Biograph mMR PET/MR) as well as experimental phantom acquisitions (Biograph mCT PET/CT). Seven patient studies following a dual-tracer (18F-FDG/13N-NH3) imaging-protocol using a PET/MR-system were also evaluated. The performance of the DPR-MoCo method was compared against reconstructions of the acquired data (No-MoCo), a reference gate method (gated) and an image-based MoCo method using the standard reconstruction-transform-average (RTA-MoCo) approach. The target-to-background ratio (TBRLV) in the myocardium and the noise in the liver (CoVliver) were evaluated for all acquisitions. For all patients, the clinical effect of the DPR-MoCo was assessed based on the end-systolic (ESV), the end-diastolic volumes (EDV) and the left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) which were compared to functional values obtained from the cardiac MR. RESULTS: The DPR-MoCo and the No-MoCo images presented with similar noise-properties (CoV) (P = .12), while the RTA-MoCo and reference-gate images showed increased noise levels (P = .05). TBRLV values increased for the motion limited reconstructions when compared to the No-MoCo reconstructions (P > .05). DPR-MoCo results showed higher correlation with the functional values obtained from the cardiac MR than the No-MoCo results, though non-significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The projection-based DPR-MoCo method helps to improve PET image quality of the myocardium without the need for external devices for motion tracking.
BACKGROUND: Respiratory patient motion causes blurring of the PET images that may impact accurate quantification of perfusion and infarction extents in PET myocardial viability studies. In this study, we investigate the feasibility of correcting for respiratory motion directly in the PET-listmode data prior to image reconstruction using a data-driven, projection-based, respiratory motion compensation (DPR-MoCo) technique. METHODS: The DPR-MoCo method was validated using simulations of a XCAT phantom (Biograph mMR PET/MR) as well as experimental phantom acquisitions (Biograph mCT PET/CT). Seven patient studies following a dual-tracer (18F-FDG/13N-NH3) imaging-protocol using a PET/MR-system were also evaluated. The performance of the DPR-MoCo method was compared against reconstructions of the acquired data (No-MoCo), a reference gate method (gated) and an image-based MoCo method using the standard reconstruction-transform-average (RTA-MoCo) approach. The target-to-background ratio (TBRLV) in the myocardium and the noise in the liver (CoVliver) were evaluated for all acquisitions. For all patients, the clinical effect of the DPR-MoCo was assessed based on the end-systolic (ESV), the end-diastolic volumes (EDV) and the left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) which were compared to functional values obtained from the cardiac MR. RESULTS: The DPR-MoCo and the No-MoCo images presented with similar noise-properties (CoV) (P = .12), while the RTA-MoCo and reference-gate images showed increased noise levels (P = .05). TBRLV values increased for the motion limited reconstructions when compared to the No-MoCo reconstructions (P > .05). DPR-MoCo results showed higher correlation with the functional values obtained from the cardiac MR than the No-MoCo results, though non-significant (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The projection-based DPR-MoCo method helps to improve PET image quality of the myocardium without the need for external devices for motion tracking.
Authors: Robert Grimm; Sebastian Fürst; Michael Souvatzoglou; Christoph Forman; Jana Hutter; Isabel Dregely; Sibylle I Ziegler; Berthold Kiefer; Joachim Hornegger; Kai Tobias Block; Stephan G Nekolla Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2014-09-30 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Martin Lyngby Lassen; Thomas Rasmussen; Thomas E Christensen; Andreas Kjær; Philip Hasbak Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2016-09-07 Impact factor: 5.952
Authors: Florian Büther; Mohammad Dawood; Lars Stegger; Frank Wübbeling; Michael Schäfers; Otmar Schober; Klaus P Schäfers Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Mohammad Dawood; Florian Büther; Lars Stegger; Xiaoyi Jiang; Otmar Schober; Michael Schäfers; Klaus P Schäfers Journal: Med Phys Date: 2009-05 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Piotr J Slomka; Mathieu Rubeaux; Ludovic Le Meunier; Damini Dey; Joel L Lazewatsky; Tinsu Pan; Marc R Dweck; David E Newby; Guido Germano; Daniel S Berman Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2015-09-24 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Martin Lyngby Lassen; Jacek Kwiecinski; Sebastien Cadet; Damini Dey; Chengjia Wang; Marc R Dweck; Daniel S Berman; Guido Germano; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: R Klén; J Teuho; T Noponen; K Thielemans; E Hoppela; E Lehtonen; H T Sipila; M Teräs; J Knuuti Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-11-09 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Martin Lyngby Lassen; Evangelos Tzolos; Daniele Massera; Sebastien Cadet; Rong Bing; Jacek Kwiecinski; Damini Dey; Daniel S Berman; Marc R Dweck; David E Newby; Piotr J Slomka Journal: EJNMMI Phys Date: 2022-01-29
Authors: Sazan Rasul; Dietrich Beitzke; Tim Wollenweber; Ivo Rausch; Martin Lyngby Lassen; Marie Elisabeth Stelzmüller; Markus Mitterhauser; Verena Pichler; Thomas Beyer; Christian Loewe; Marcus Hacker Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2020-10-22 Impact factor: 3.872
Authors: Jack P M Andrews; Gillian MacNaught; Alastair J Moss; Mhairi K Doris; Tania Pawade; Philip D Adamson; Edwin J R van Beek; Christophe Lucatelli; Martin L Lassen; Philip M Robson; Zahi A Fayad; Jacek Kwiecinski; Piotr J Slomka; Daniel S Berman; David E Newby; Marc R Dweck Journal: J Nucl Cardiol Date: 2019-12-02 Impact factor: 5.952