Image-based point spread function implementation in a fully 3D OSEM reconstruction algorithm for PET

The interest in positron emission tomography (PET) and particularly in hybrid integrated PET/CT systems has significantly increased in the last few years due to the improved quality of the obtained images. Nevertheless, one of the most important limits of the PET imaging technique is still its poor spatial resolution due to several physical factors originating both at the emission (e.g. positron range, photon non-collinearity) and at detection levels (e.g. scatter inside the scintillating crystals, finite dimensions of the crystals and depth of interaction). To improve the spatial resolution of the images, a possible way consists of measuring the point spread function (PSF) of the system and then accounting for it inside the reconstruction algorithm. In this work, the system response of the GE Discovery STE operating in 3D mode has been characterized by acquiring (22)Na point sources in different positions of the scanner field of view. An image-based model of the PSF was then obtained by fitting asymmetric two-dimensional Gaussians on the (22)Na images reconstructed with small pixel sizes. The PSF was then incorporated, at the image level, in a three-dimensional ordered subset maximum likelihood expectation maximization (OS-MLEM) reconstruction algorithm. A qualitative and quantitative validation of the algorithm accounting for the PSF has been performed on phantom and clinical data, showing improved spatial resolution, higher contrast and lower noise compared with the corresponding images obtained using the standard OS-MLEM algorithm.

[1]  B. De Man,et al.  Distance-driven projection and backprojection in three dimensions. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  C. Eijk,et al.  Radiation detector developments in medical applications: inorganic scintillators in positron emission tomography , 2008 .

[3]  Jing Tang,et al.  Analytic system matrix resolution modeling in PET: an application to Rb-82 cardiac imaging , 2008, 2008 5th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[4]  L. Shepp,et al.  Maximum Likelihood Reconstruction for Emission Tomography , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[5]  J. Knuuti,et al.  Performance of the new generation of whole-body PET/CT scanners: Discovery STE and Discovery VCT , 2007, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[6]  Thomas K. Lewellen,et al.  Modeling and incorporation of system response functions in 3-D whole body PET , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[7]  Scott David Wollenweber,et al.  Parameterization of a model-based 3-D PET scatter correction , 2002 .

[8]  Paul E. Kinahan,et al.  Application of a spatially variant system model for 3-D whole-body pet image reconstruction , 2008, 2008 5th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[9]  David Brasse,et al.  Correction methods for random coincidences in fully 3D whole-body PET: impact on data and image quality. , 2005, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[10]  Andrew J. Reader,et al.  Impact of Image-Space Resolution Modeling for Studies with the High-Resolution Research Tomograph , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

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

[12]  Andrew J. Reader,et al.  EM algorithm system modeling by image-space techniques for PET reconstruction , 2003 .

[13]  Bernd J Pichler,et al.  Latest Advances in Molecular Imaging Instrumentation , 2008, Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

[14]  R.L. Harrison,et al.  Measured spatially variant system response for PET image reconstruction , 2005, IEEE Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, 2005.

[15]  Andrew J Reader,et al.  The promise of new PET image reconstruction. , 2008, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[16]  H. Malcolm Hudson,et al.  Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data , 1994, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[17]  Dan J. Kadrmas,et al.  Modeling the spatially-variant point spread function in a fast projector for improved fully-3D PET reconstruction , 2007 .

[18]  Ignace Lemahieu,et al.  A three-dimensional theoretical model incorporating spatial detection uncertainty in continuous detector PET. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[19]  Ronald Boellaard,et al.  Performance evaluation of the ECAT HRRT: an LSO-LYSO double layer high resolution, high sensitivity scanner , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.

[20]  Jinyi Qi,et al.  Iterative reconstruction techniques in emission computed tomography , 2006, Physics in medicine and biology.

[21]  J. Ollinger Model-based scatter correction for fully 3D PET. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

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

[23]  Jinyi Qi,et al.  Iterative image reconstruction for positron emission tomography based on a detector response function estimated from point source measurements , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[24]  Tom K Lewellen,et al.  Recent developments in PET detector technology , 2008, Physics in medicine and biology.