Isaac Shiri1, Pardis Ghafarian2,3, Parham Geramifar4, Kevin Ho-Yin Leung5,6, Mostafa Ghelichoghli7, Mehrdad Oveisi7,8, Arman Rahmim6,9,10, Mohammad Reza Ay11,12. 1. Research Center for Molecular and Cellular Imaging, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 2. Chronic Respiratory Diseases Research Center, National Research Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases (NRITLD), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. pardis.ghafarian@sbmu.ac.ir. 3. PET/CT and Cyclotron Center, Masih Daneshvari Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. pardis.ghafarian@sbmu.ac.ir. 4. Research Center for Nuclear Medicine, Shariati Hospital, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. 5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. 7. Department of Biomedical and Health Informatics, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran. 8. Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 9. Departments of Radiology and Physics & Astronomy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 10. Department of Integrative Oncology, BC Cancer Research Centre, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 11. Research Center for Molecular and Cellular Imaging, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. mohammadreza_ay@sina.tums.ac.ir. 12. Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. mohammadreza_ay@sina.tums.ac.ir.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To obtain attenuation-corrected PET images directly from non-attenuation-corrected images using a convolutional encoder-decoder network. METHODS: Brain PET images from 129 patients were evaluated. The network was designed to map non-attenuation-corrected (NAC) images to pixel-wise continuously valued measured attenuation-corrected (MAC) PET images via an encoder-decoder architecture. Image quality was evaluated using various evaluation metrics. Image quantification was assessed for 19 radiomic features in 83 brain regions as delineated using the Hammersmith atlas (n30r83). Reliability of measurements was determined using pixel-wise relative errors (RE; %) for radiomic feature values in reference MAC PET images. RESULTS: Peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity index metric (SSIM) values were 39.2 ± 3.65 and 0.989 ± 0.006 for the external validation set, respectively. RE (%) of SUVmean was - 0.10 ± 2.14 for all regions, and only 3 of 83 regions depicted significant differences. However, the mean RE (%) of this region was 0.02 (range, - 0.83 to 1.18). SUVmax had mean RE (%) of - 3.87 ± 2.84 for all brain regions, and 17 regions in the brain depicted significant differences with respect to MAC images with a mean RE of - 3.99 ± 2.11 (range, - 8.46 to 0.76). Homogeneity amongst Haralick-based radiomic features had the highest number (20) of regions with significant differences with a mean RE (%) of 7.22 ± 2.99. CONCLUSIONS: Direct AC of PET images using deep convolutional encoder-decoder networks is a promising technique for brain PET images. The proposed deep learning method shows significant potential for emission-based AC in PET images with applications in PET/MRI and dedicated brain PET scanners. KEY POINTS: • We demonstrate direct emission-based attenuation correction of PET images without using anatomical information. • We performed radiomics analysis of 83 brain regions to show robustness of direct attenuation correction of PET images. • Deep learning methods have significant promise for emission-based attenuation correction in PET images with potential applications in PET/MRI and dedicated brain PET scanners.
OBJECTIVE: To obtain attenuation-corrected PET images directly from non-attenuation-corrected images using a convolutional encoder-decoder network. METHODS: Brain PET images from 129 patients were evaluated. The network was designed to map non-attenuation-corrected (NAC) images to pixel-wise continuously valued measured attenuation-corrected (MAC) PET images via an encoder-decoder architecture. Image quality was evaluated using various evaluation metrics. Image quantification was assessed for 19 radiomic features in 83 brain regions as delineated using the Hammersmith atlas (n30r83). Reliability of measurements was determined using pixel-wise relative errors (RE; %) for radiomic feature values in reference MAC PET images. RESULTS: Peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and structural similarity index metric (SSIM) values were 39.2 ± 3.65 and 0.989 ± 0.006 for the external validation set, respectively. RE (%) of SUVmean was - 0.10 ± 2.14 for all regions, and only 3 of 83 regions depicted significant differences. However, the mean RE (%) of this region was 0.02 (range, - 0.83 to 1.18). SUVmax had mean RE (%) of - 3.87 ± 2.84 for all brain regions, and 17 regions in the brain depicted significant differences with respect to MAC images with a mean RE of - 3.99 ± 2.11 (range, - 8.46 to 0.76). Homogeneity amongst Haralick-based radiomic features had the highest number (20) of regions with significant differences with a mean RE (%) of 7.22 ± 2.99. CONCLUSIONS: Direct AC of PET images using deep convolutional encoder-decoder networks is a promising technique for brain PET images. The proposed deep learning method shows significant potential for emission-based AC in PET images with applications in PET/MRI and dedicated brain PET scanners. KEY POINTS: • We demonstrate direct emission-based attenuation correction of PET images without using anatomical information. • We performed radiomics analysis of 83 brain regions to show robustness of direct attenuation correction of PET images. • Deep learning methods have significant promise for emission-based attenuation correction in PET images with potential applications in PET/MRI and dedicated brain PET scanners.
Authors: Jaewon Yang; Florian Wiesinger; Sandeep Kaushik; Dattesh Shanbhag; Thomas A Hope; Peder E Z Larson; Youngho Seo Journal: J Nucl Med Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 10.057
Authors: Joost J M van Griethuysen; Andriy Fedorov; Chintan Parmar; Ahmed Hosny; Nicole Aucoin; Vivek Narayan; Regina G H Beets-Tan; Jean-Christophe Fillion-Robin; Steve Pieper; Hugo J W L Aerts Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Claes N Ladefoged; Ian Law; Udunna Anazodo; Keith St Lawrence; David Izquierdo-Garcia; Ciprian Catana; Ninon Burgos; M Jorge Cardoso; Sebastien Ourselin; Brian Hutton; Inés Mérida; Nicolas Costes; Alexander Hammers; Didier Benoit; Søren Holm; Meher Juttukonda; Hongyu An; Jorge Cabello; Mathias Lukas; Stephan Nekolla; Sibylle Ziegler; Matthias Fenchel; Bjoern Jakoby; Michael E Casey; Tammie Benzinger; Liselotte Højgaard; Adam E Hansen; Flemming L Andersen Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2016-12-14 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Alexander Hammers; Richard Allom; Matthias J Koepp; Samantha L Free; Ralph Myers; Louis Lemieux; Tejal N Mitchell; David J Brooks; John S Duncan Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 5.038
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: Kuang Gong; Jaewon Yang; Peder E Z Larson; Spencer C Behr; Thomas A Hope; Youngho Seo; Quanzheng Li Journal: IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci Date: 2020-07-03
Authors: Takuya Toyonaga; Dan Shao; Luyao Shi; Jiazhen Zhang; Enette Mae Revilla; David Menard; Joseph Ankrah; Kenji Hirata; Ming-Kai Chen; John A Onofrey; Yihuan Lu Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2022-03-12 Impact factor: 10.057