Paulo R R V Caribé1, M Koole2, Yves D'Asseler3, B Van Den Broeck3, S Vandenberghe4. 1. Medical Image and Signal Processing - MEDISIP, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Gent, Belgium. paulo.caribe@ugent.be. 2. Division of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, UZ/KU, Herestraat 49, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium. 3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Gent, Belgium. 4. Medical Image and Signal Processing - MEDISIP, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Gent, Belgium.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Q.Clear is a block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm for PET. It tries to improve image quality by controlling noise amplification during image reconstruction. In this study, the noise properties of this BSREM were compared to the ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm for both phantom and patient data acquired on a state-of-the-art PET/CT. METHODS: The NEMA IQ phantom and a whole-body patient study were acquired on a GE DMI 3-rings system in list mode and different datasets with varying noise levels were generated. Phantom data was evaluated using four different contrast ratios. These were reconstructed using BSREM with different β-factors of 300-3000 and with a clinical setting used for OSEM including point spread function (PSF) and time-of-flight (TOF) information. Contrast recovery (CR), background noise levels (coefficient of variation, COV), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were used to determine the performance in the phantom data. Findings based on the phantom data were compared with clinical data. For the patient study, the SUV ratio, metabolic active tumor volumes (MATVs), and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were evaluated using the liver as the background region. RESULTS: Based on the phantom data for the same count statistics, BSREM resulted in higher CR and CNR and lower COV than OSEM. The CR of OSEM matches to the CR of BSREM with β = 750 at high count statistics for 8:1. A similar trend was observed for the ratios 6:1 and 4:1. A dependence on sphere size, counting statistics, and contrast ratio was confirmed by the CNR of the ratio 2:1. BSREM with β = 750 for 2.5 and 1.0 min acquisition has comparable COV to the 10 and 5.0 min acquisitions using OSEM. This resulted in a noise reduction by a factor of 2-4 when using BSREM instead of OSEM. For the patient data, a similar trend was observed, and SNR was reduced by at least a factor of 2 while preserving contrast. CONCLUSION: The BSREM reconstruction algorithm allowed a noise reduction without a loss of contrast by a factor of 2-4 compared to OSEM reconstructions for all data evaluated. This reduction can be used to lower the injected dose or shorten the acquisition time.
PURPOSE: Q.Clear is a block sequential regularized expectation maximization (BSREM) penalized-likelihood reconstruction algorithm for PET. It tries to improve image quality by controlling noise amplification during image reconstruction. In this study, the noise properties of this BSREM were compared to the ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm for both phantom and patient data acquired on a state-of-the-art PET/CT. METHODS: The NEMA IQ phantom and a whole-body patient study were acquired on a GE DMI 3-rings system in list mode and different datasets with varying noise levels were generated. Phantom data was evaluated using four different contrast ratios. These were reconstructed using BSREM with different β-factors of 300-3000 and with a clinical setting used for OSEM including point spread function (PSF) and time-of-flight (TOF) information. Contrast recovery (CR), background noise levels (coefficient of variation, COV), and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were used to determine the performance in the phantom data. Findings based on the phantom data were compared with clinical data. For the patient study, the SUV ratio, metabolic active tumor volumes (MATVs), and the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) were evaluated using the liver as the background region. RESULTS: Based on the phantom data for the same count statistics, BSREM resulted in higher CR and CNR and lower COV than OSEM. The CR of OSEM matches to the CR of BSREM with β = 750 at high count statistics for 8:1. A similar trend was observed for the ratios 6:1 and 4:1. A dependence on sphere size, counting statistics, and contrast ratio was confirmed by the CNR of the ratio 2:1. BSREM with β = 750 for 2.5 and 1.0 min acquisition has comparable COV to the 10 and 5.0 min acquisitions using OSEM. This resulted in a noise reduction by a factor of 2-4 when using BSREM instead of OSEM. For the patient data, a similar trend was observed, and SNR was reduced by at least a factor of 2 while preserving contrast. CONCLUSION: The BSREM reconstruction algorithm allowed a noise reduction without a loss of contrast by a factor of 2-4 compared to OSEM reconstructions for all data evaluated. This reduction can be used to lower the injected dose or shorten the acquisition time.
Authors: Julian M M Rogasch; Frank Hofheinz; Lutz van Heek; Conrad-Amadeus Voltin; Ronald Boellaard; Carsten Kobe Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2022-02-10
Authors: Julian M M Rogasch; Ronald Boellaard; Lucy Pike; Peter Borchmann; Peter Johnson; Jürgen Wolf; Sally F Barrington; Carsten Kobe Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Abolfazl Mehranian; Scott D Wollenweber; Matthew D Walker; Kevin M Bradley; Patrick A Fielding; Kuan-Hao Su; Robert Johnsen; Fotis Kotasidis; Floris P Jansen; Daniel R McGowan Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2021-07-28 Impact factor: 9.236