• DocumentCode
    1139421
  • Title

    A comparison of four-image reconstruction algorithms for 3-D PET imaging of MDAPET camera using phantom data

  • Author

    Baghaei, Hossain ; Wong, Wai-Hoi ; Uribe, Jorge ; Li, Hongdi ; Wang, Yu ; Liu, Yaqiang ; Xing, Tao ; Ramirez, Rocio ; Xie, Shuping ; Kim, Soonseok

  • Author_Institution
    M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, Univ. of Texas, Houston, TX, USA
  • Volume
    51
  • Issue
    5
  • fYear
    2004
  • Firstpage
    2563
  • Lastpage
    2569
  • Abstract
    We compared two fully three-dimensional (3-D) image reconstruction algorithms and two 3-D rebinning algorithms followed by reconstruction with a two-dimensional (2-D) filtered-backprojection algorithm for 3-D positron emission tomography (PET) imaging. The two 3-D image reconstruction algorithms were ordered-subsets expectation-maximization (3D-OSEM) and 3-D reprojection (3DRP) algorithms. The two rebinning algorithms were Fourier rebinning (FORE) and single slice rebinning (SSRB). The 3-D projection data used for this work were acquired with a high-resolution PET scanner (MDAPET) with an intrinsic transaxial resolution of 2.8 mm. The scanner has 14 detector rings covering an axial field-of-view of 38.5 mm. We scanned three phantoms: 1) a uniform cylindrical phantom with inner diameter of 21.5 cm; 2) a uniform 11.5-cm cylindrical phantom with four embedded small hot lesions with diameters of 3, 4, 5, and 6 mm; and 3) the 3-D Hoffman brain phantom with three embedded small hot lesion phantoms with diameters of 3, 5, and 8.6 mm in a warm background. Lesions were placed at different radial and axial distances. We evaluated the different reconstruction methods for MDAPET camera by comparing the noise level of images, contrast recovery, and hot lesion detection, and visually compared images. We found that overall the 3D-OSEM algorithm, especially when images post filtered with the Metz filter, produced the best results in terms of contrast-noise tradeoff, and detection of hot spots, and reproduction of brain phantom structures. Even though the MDAPET camera has a relatively small maximum axial acceptance (±5 deg), images produced with the 3DRP algorithm had slightly better contrast recovery and reproduced the structures of the brain phantom slightly better than the faster 2-D rebinning methods.
  • Keywords
    biomedical imaging; brain; image reconstruction; medical image processing; noise; phantoms; positron emission tomography; 3-D Hoffman brain phantom; 3-D positron emission tomography imaging; 3-D projection data; 3-D rebinning algorithms; 3-D reprojection algorithms; 3D-OSEM algorithm; Fourier rebinning; MDAPET camera; Metz filter; axial distance; axial field-of-view; brain phantom structures; contrast recovery; contrast-noise tradeoff; detector rings; faster 2-D rebinning methods; high-resolution PET scanner; hot lesion detection; hot spot detection; image noise level; inner diameter; intrinsic transaxial resolution; ordered-subsets expectation-maximization; radial distance; single slice rebinning; three embedded small hot lesion phantoms; three-dimensional image reconstruction algorithms; two-dimensional filtered-backprojection algorithm; uniform cylindrical phantom; visually compared images; Cameras; Detectors; High-resolution imaging; Image reconstruction; Imaging phantoms; Lesions; Noise level; Positron emission tomography; Reconstruction algorithms; Two dimensional displays; Filtered backprojection; PET; image reconstruction; ordered-subsets expectation-maximization; positron emission tomography;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Journal_Title
    Nuclear Science, IEEE Transactions on
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • ISSN
    0018-9499
  • Type

    jour

  • DOI
    10.1109/TNS.2004.834809
  • Filename
    1344378