Theoretical analysis of resolution and noise properties of PET image reconstruction with and without sinogram blurring modeling

The detector response due to inter-crystal scatter, penetration and non-colinearity in PET can be modeled using blurring point spread functions (PSFs) in sinogram or image space. Incorporating PSFs into image reconstruction is expected to provide better image quality because of accurate system modeling. It has been widely observed that PSF-based reconstruction produces better spatial resolution with more pronounced overshoot/undershoot near edges and yields lower variance and more correlated image noise than non-PSF reconstruction. These findings have been mostly empirically made and there has not been much of rigorous explanation about the reason for the behaviors. In this study, we investigate the underlying mathematical structure of PSF-based and non-PSF image reconstruction and attempt to provide a mathematical explanation about the distinct behaviors they show. The local impulse response and the covariance of PSF-based and non-PSF penalized-likelihood image reconstruction are analyzed in continuous space to obtain useful insights. From the continuous-space analysis, we address why PSF-based reconstruction produces pronounced overshoot/undershoot near edges and what is the limitation of non-PSF reconstruction in achievable image resolution. In addition, it is analytically shown that PSF-based reconstruction results in spatially more correlated noise than non-PSF reconstruction at matched ensemble pixel variance. Finally, it is demonstrated that PSF-based reconstruction not only produces a lower pixel variance than non-PSF reconstruction at matched spatial resolution but also nearly achieves the minimum pixel variance for given spatial resolution.

[1]  J.A. Fessler Analytical approach to regularization design for isotropic spatial resolution , 2003, 2003 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium. Conference Record (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37515).

[2]  Paul Kinahan,et al.  Noise and signal properties in PSF-based fully 3D PET image reconstruction: an experimental evaluation , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[3]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Spatial resolution properties of penalized-likelihood image reconstruction: space-invariant tomographs , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[4]  A. Rahmim,et al.  Resolution modeling in PET imaging: theory, practice, benefits, and pitfalls. , 2013, Medical physics.

[5]  John G. Proakis,et al.  Digital Signal Processing: Principles, Algorithms, and Applications , 1992 .

[6]  Kris Thielemans,et al.  Trade-off between contrast recovery, image noise and edge artifacts in PET image reconstruction using detector blurring models , 2011, 2011 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record.

[7]  Vladimir Y. Panin,et al.  Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[8]  Jeffrey A. Fessler Mean and variance of implicitly defined biased estimators (such as penalized maximum likelihood): applications to tomography , 1996, IEEE Trans. Image Process..

[9]  Steven G. Ross,et al.  Application and Evaluation of a Measured Spatially Variant System Model for PET Image Reconstruction , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[10]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Resolution Properties of Regularized Image Reconstruction Methods , 2002 .

[11]  R. Leahy,et al.  High-resolution 3D Bayesian image reconstruction using the microPET small-animal scanner. , 1998, Physics in medicine and biology.

[12]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  A penalized-likelihood image reconstruction method for emission tomography, compared to postsmoothed maximum-likelihood with matched spatial resolution , 2003, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[13]  S. Ross,et al.  Power laws for image quality measures in PET penalized-likelihood image reconstruction , 2013, 2013 IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (2013 NSS/MIC).