Differences in edge artifacts between 68Ga- and 18F-PET images reconstructed using point spread function correction

Shinji Amakusa, Koki Matsuoka, Shingo Baba, Tsuyoshi Yoshida, Masayuki Sasaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Edge artifacts have been reported on in relation to F-PET using point spread function correction algorithms. The positron range of Ga is longer than F, and this difference is thought to result in different edge artifacts. The purpose of this study is to clarify the difference in edge artifacts in PET images using point spread function correction in Ga- and F-PET. METHODS: We used a National Electrical Manufacturers Association International Electrotechnical Commission body phantom. The phantom was filled severally with Ga and F solution. The PET data were obtained over a 90 minutes period using a True Point Biograph 16 scanner. The images were then reconstructed with the ordered subset expectation maximization with point spread function correction. The phantom image analyses were performed by a visual assessment of the PET images and profiles, and an absolute recovery coefficient, which was the ratio of the maximum radioactivity of any given hot sphere to its true radioactivity. RESULTS: The ring-like edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those in F-PET. The relative radioactivity profiles of Ga-PET showed low overshoots of the maximum radioactivity although high overshoots did appear in F-PET. The absolute recovery coefficients of Ga-PET were smaller than those of F-PET. CONCLUSION: The edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those of F-PET, and their overshoots were smaller. The difference in the positron range between Ga and F may possibly result in the difference in edge artifacts of images reconstructed using the point spread function correction algorithm.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1166-1173
Number of pages8
JournalNuclear medicine communications
Volume40
Issue number11
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1 2019

Fingerprint

Artifacts
Radioactivity
Electrons

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Differences in edge artifacts between 68Ga- and 18F-PET images reconstructed using point spread function correction. / Amakusa, Shinji; Matsuoka, Koki; Baba, Shingo; Yoshida, Tsuyoshi; Sasaki, Masayuki.

In: Nuclear medicine communications, Vol. 40, No. 11, 01.11.2019, p. 1166-1173.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{657fcfbb044749c3b57b7ad1ab5b54c3,
title = "Differences in edge artifacts between 68Ga- and 18F-PET images reconstructed using point spread function correction",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Edge artifacts have been reported on in relation to F-PET using point spread function correction algorithms. The positron range of Ga is longer than F, and this difference is thought to result in different edge artifacts. The purpose of this study is to clarify the difference in edge artifacts in PET images using point spread function correction in Ga- and F-PET. METHODS: We used a National Electrical Manufacturers Association International Electrotechnical Commission body phantom. The phantom was filled severally with Ga and F solution. The PET data were obtained over a 90 minutes period using a True Point Biograph 16 scanner. The images were then reconstructed with the ordered subset expectation maximization with point spread function correction. The phantom image analyses were performed by a visual assessment of the PET images and profiles, and an absolute recovery coefficient, which was the ratio of the maximum radioactivity of any given hot sphere to its true radioactivity. RESULTS: The ring-like edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those in F-PET. The relative radioactivity profiles of Ga-PET showed low overshoots of the maximum radioactivity although high overshoots did appear in F-PET. The absolute recovery coefficients of Ga-PET were smaller than those of F-PET. CONCLUSION: The edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those of F-PET, and their overshoots were smaller. The difference in the positron range between Ga and F may possibly result in the difference in edge artifacts of images reconstructed using the point spread function correction algorithm.",
author = "Shinji Amakusa and Koki Matsuoka and Shingo Baba and Tsuyoshi Yoshida and Masayuki Sasaki",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/MNM.0000000000001079",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "1166--1173",
journal = "Nuclear Medicine Communications",
issn = "0143-3636",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in edge artifacts between 68Ga- and 18F-PET images reconstructed using point spread function correction

AU - Amakusa, Shinji

AU - Matsuoka, Koki

AU - Baba, Shingo

AU - Yoshida, Tsuyoshi

AU - Sasaki, Masayuki

PY - 2019/11/1

Y1 - 2019/11/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Edge artifacts have been reported on in relation to F-PET using point spread function correction algorithms. The positron range of Ga is longer than F, and this difference is thought to result in different edge artifacts. The purpose of this study is to clarify the difference in edge artifacts in PET images using point spread function correction in Ga- and F-PET. METHODS: We used a National Electrical Manufacturers Association International Electrotechnical Commission body phantom. The phantom was filled severally with Ga and F solution. The PET data were obtained over a 90 minutes period using a True Point Biograph 16 scanner. The images were then reconstructed with the ordered subset expectation maximization with point spread function correction. The phantom image analyses were performed by a visual assessment of the PET images and profiles, and an absolute recovery coefficient, which was the ratio of the maximum radioactivity of any given hot sphere to its true radioactivity. RESULTS: The ring-like edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those in F-PET. The relative radioactivity profiles of Ga-PET showed low overshoots of the maximum radioactivity although high overshoots did appear in F-PET. The absolute recovery coefficients of Ga-PET were smaller than those of F-PET. CONCLUSION: The edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those of F-PET, and their overshoots were smaller. The difference in the positron range between Ga and F may possibly result in the difference in edge artifacts of images reconstructed using the point spread function correction algorithm.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Edge artifacts have been reported on in relation to F-PET using point spread function correction algorithms. The positron range of Ga is longer than F, and this difference is thought to result in different edge artifacts. The purpose of this study is to clarify the difference in edge artifacts in PET images using point spread function correction in Ga- and F-PET. METHODS: We used a National Electrical Manufacturers Association International Electrotechnical Commission body phantom. The phantom was filled severally with Ga and F solution. The PET data were obtained over a 90 minutes period using a True Point Biograph 16 scanner. The images were then reconstructed with the ordered subset expectation maximization with point spread function correction. The phantom image analyses were performed by a visual assessment of the PET images and profiles, and an absolute recovery coefficient, which was the ratio of the maximum radioactivity of any given hot sphere to its true radioactivity. RESULTS: The ring-like edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those in F-PET. The relative radioactivity profiles of Ga-PET showed low overshoots of the maximum radioactivity although high overshoots did appear in F-PET. The absolute recovery coefficients of Ga-PET were smaller than those of F-PET. CONCLUSION: The edge artifacts of Ga-PET were less prominent than those of F-PET, and their overshoots were smaller. The difference in the positron range between Ga and F may possibly result in the difference in edge artifacts of images reconstructed using the point spread function correction algorithm.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073309273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85073309273&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001079

DO - 10.1097/MNM.0000000000001079

M3 - Article

C2 - 31469808

AN - SCOPUS:85073309273

VL - 40

SP - 1166

EP - 1173

JO - Nuclear Medicine Communications

JF - Nuclear Medicine Communications

SN - 0143-3636

IS - 11

ER -