Comparison of Reconstruction Methods in a Small Animal Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography Study Using a 18F-Labeled Myocardial Agent, [18F] FPTP

Kim, Hyeon-Sik; Lee, Byeong-Il; Kim, Ju Han; Bom, Hee‐Seung; Kim, Dong Yeon; Min, Jung‐Joon

doi:10.5812/iranjradiol.26806

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sondergaard HM et al reported that the OSEM reconstruction method produced better image quality and less noise than the FBP reconstruction method [16]. HS Kim et al compared reconstruction methods (FBP, OSEM2D, OSEM3D, and 3DRP) in cardiac PET imaging and reported that the OSEM3D reconstruction method showed a higher correlation with TTC staining and provided better image quality and contrast than other methods [17]. Post-filtering produces blurred images but can reduce the image noise.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of MicroPET Image Quality Based on Reconstruction Methods and Post-Filtering

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The accuracy of positron emission tomography (PET) imaging is hampered by the partial volume effect (PVE), which causes image blurring and sampling. The PVE produces spillover phenomena, making PET analysis difficult. Generally, the PVE values vary based on reconstruction methods and filtering. Thus, selection of the proper reconstruction and filtering method can ensure accurate and high-quality PET images. This study compared the values of factors (recovery coefficient (RC), uniformity, and spillover ratio (SOR)) associated with different reconstruction and post-filtering methods using a mouse image quality phantom (NEMA NU 4), and we present an effective approach for microPET images. The PET images were obtained using a microPET scanner (Inveon, Siemens Medical Solutions, Malvern, PA, USA). PET data were reconstructed and/or post-filtered. For tumors smaller than 3 mm, iterative reconstruction methods provided better image quality. For tumor sizes bigger than 3 mm, reconstruction methods without post-filtering showed better results.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of MicroPET Image Quality Based on Reconstruction Methods and Post-Filtering

2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Oxygen-15 labeled CO2, O2, and CO PET in small animals: evaluation using a 3D-mode microPET scanner and impact of reconstruction algorithms

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPositron emission tomography (PET) studies using 15O-labeled CO2, O2, and CO have been used in humans to evaluate cerebral blood flow (CBF), the cerebral oxygen extraction fraction (OEF), and the cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (CMRO2) and cerebral blood volume (CBV), respectively. In preclinical studies, however, PET studies using 15O-labeled gases are not widely performed because of the technical difficulties associated with handling labeled gases with a short half-life. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the scatter fraction using 3D-mode micro-PET for 15O-labeled gas studies and the influence of reconstruction algorithms on quantitative values.Nine male SD rats were studied using the steady state inhalation method for 15O-labeled gases with arterial blood sampling. The resulting PET images were reconstructed using filtered back projection (FBP), ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) 2D, or OSEM 3D followed by maximum a posteriori (OSEM3D-MAP). The quantitative values for each brain region and each reconstruction method were calculated by applying different reconstruction methods.ResultsThe quantitative values for the whole brain as calculated using FBP were 46.6 ± 12.5 mL/100 mL/min (CBF), 63.7 ± 7.2% (OEF), 5.72 ± 0.34 mL/100 mL/min (CMRO2), and 5.66 ± 0.34 mL/100 mL (CBV), respectively. The CBF and CMRO2 values were significantly higher when the OSEM2D and OSEM3D-MAP reconstruction methods were used, compared with FBP, whereas the OEF values were significantly lower when reconstructed using OSEM3D-MAP.ConclusionsWe evaluated the difference in quantitative values among the reconstruction algorithms using 3D-mode micro-PET. The iterative reconstruction method resulted in significantly higher quantitative values for CBF and CMRO2, compared with the values calculated using the FBP reconstruction method.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13550-017-0335-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Comparison of Reconstruction Methods in a Small Animal Cardiac Positron Emission Tomography Study Using a 18F-Labeled Myocardial Agent, [18F] FPTP

Cited by 2 publications

References 24 publications

Assessment of MicroPET Image Quality Based on Reconstruction Methods and Post-Filtering

Assessment of MicroPET Image Quality Based on Reconstruction Methods and Post-Filtering

Oxygen-15 labeled CO2, O2, and CO PET in small animals: evaluation using a 3D-mode microPET scanner and impact of reconstruction algorithms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About