Edge Artifacts in Point Spread Function-based PET Reconstruction in Relation to Object Size and Reconstruction Parameters

Yuji Tsutsui, Shinichi Awamoto, Kazuhiko Himuro, Yoshiyuki Umezu, Shingo Baba, Masayuki Sasaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated edge artifacts in relation to phantom diameter and reconstruction parameters in point spread function (PSF)-based positron emission tomography (PET) image reconstruction.

METHODS: PET data were acquired from an original cone-shaped phantom filled with 18F solution (21.9 kBq/mL) for 10 min using a Biograph mCT scanner. The images were reconstructed using the baseline ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm and the OSEM with PSF correction model. The reconstruction parameters included a pixel size of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm, 1-12 iterations, 24 subsets, and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the post-filter Gaussian filter of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm. We compared both the maximum recovery coefficient (RCmax) and the mean recovery coefficient (RCmean) in the phantom at different diameters.

RESULTS: The OSEM images had no edge artifacts, but the OSEM with PSF images had a dense edge delineating the hot phantom at diameters 10 mm or more and a dense spot at the center at diameters of 8 mm or less. The dense edge was clearly observed on images with a small pixel size, a Gaussian filter with a small FWHM, and a high number of iterations. At a phantom diameter of 6-7 mm, the RCmax for the OSEM and OSEM with PSF images was 60% and 140%, respectively (pixel size: 1.0 mm; FWHM of the Gaussian filter: 2.0 mm; iterations: 2). The RCmean of the OSEM with PSF images did not exceed 100%.

CONCLUSION: PSF-based image reconstruction resulted in edge artifacts, the degree of which depends on the pixel size, number of iterations, FWHM of the Gaussian filter, and object size.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)134-143
Number of pages10
JournalAsia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology
Volume5
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

Positron-Emission Tomography
Artifacts
Computer-Assisted Image Processing

Cite this

Edge Artifacts in Point Spread Function-based PET Reconstruction in Relation to Object Size and Reconstruction Parameters. / Tsutsui, Yuji; Awamoto, Shinichi; Himuro, Kazuhiko; Umezu, Yoshiyuki; Baba, Shingo; Sasaki, Masayuki.

In: Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology, Vol. 5, No. 2, 2017, p. 134-143.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{1e08ba7787984a52a76e8d650a09a6d7,
title = "Edge Artifacts in Point Spread Function-based PET Reconstruction in Relation to Object Size and Reconstruction Parameters",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: We evaluated edge artifacts in relation to phantom diameter and reconstruction parameters in point spread function (PSF)-based positron emission tomography (PET) image reconstruction.METHODS: PET data were acquired from an original cone-shaped phantom filled with 18F solution (21.9 kBq/mL) for 10 min using a Biograph mCT scanner. The images were reconstructed using the baseline ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm and the OSEM with PSF correction model. The reconstruction parameters included a pixel size of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm, 1-12 iterations, 24 subsets, and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the post-filter Gaussian filter of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm. We compared both the maximum recovery coefficient (RCmax) and the mean recovery coefficient (RCmean) in the phantom at different diameters.RESULTS: The OSEM images had no edge artifacts, but the OSEM with PSF images had a dense edge delineating the hot phantom at diameters 10 mm or more and a dense spot at the center at diameters of 8 mm or less. The dense edge was clearly observed on images with a small pixel size, a Gaussian filter with a small FWHM, and a high number of iterations. At a phantom diameter of 6-7 mm, the RCmax for the OSEM and OSEM with PSF images was 60{\%} and 140{\%}, respectively (pixel size: 1.0 mm; FWHM of the Gaussian filter: 2.0 mm; iterations: 2). The RCmean of the OSEM with PSF images did not exceed 100{\%}.CONCLUSION: PSF-based image reconstruction resulted in edge artifacts, the degree of which depends on the pixel size, number of iterations, FWHM of the Gaussian filter, and object size.",
author = "Yuji Tsutsui and Shinichi Awamoto and Kazuhiko Himuro and Yoshiyuki Umezu and Shingo Baba and Masayuki Sasaki",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.22038/aojnmb.2017.8802",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "134--143",
journal = "Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology",
issn = "2322-5718",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Edge Artifacts in Point Spread Function-based PET Reconstruction in Relation to Object Size and Reconstruction Parameters

AU - Tsutsui, Yuji

AU - Awamoto, Shinichi

AU - Himuro, Kazuhiko

AU - Umezu, Yoshiyuki

AU - Baba, Shingo

AU - Sasaki, Masayuki

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - OBJECTIVES: We evaluated edge artifacts in relation to phantom diameter and reconstruction parameters in point spread function (PSF)-based positron emission tomography (PET) image reconstruction.METHODS: PET data were acquired from an original cone-shaped phantom filled with 18F solution (21.9 kBq/mL) for 10 min using a Biograph mCT scanner. The images were reconstructed using the baseline ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm and the OSEM with PSF correction model. The reconstruction parameters included a pixel size of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm, 1-12 iterations, 24 subsets, and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the post-filter Gaussian filter of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm. We compared both the maximum recovery coefficient (RCmax) and the mean recovery coefficient (RCmean) in the phantom at different diameters.RESULTS: The OSEM images had no edge artifacts, but the OSEM with PSF images had a dense edge delineating the hot phantom at diameters 10 mm or more and a dense spot at the center at diameters of 8 mm or less. The dense edge was clearly observed on images with a small pixel size, a Gaussian filter with a small FWHM, and a high number of iterations. At a phantom diameter of 6-7 mm, the RCmax for the OSEM and OSEM with PSF images was 60% and 140%, respectively (pixel size: 1.0 mm; FWHM of the Gaussian filter: 2.0 mm; iterations: 2). The RCmean of the OSEM with PSF images did not exceed 100%.CONCLUSION: PSF-based image reconstruction resulted in edge artifacts, the degree of which depends on the pixel size, number of iterations, FWHM of the Gaussian filter, and object size.

AB - OBJECTIVES: We evaluated edge artifacts in relation to phantom diameter and reconstruction parameters in point spread function (PSF)-based positron emission tomography (PET) image reconstruction.METHODS: PET data were acquired from an original cone-shaped phantom filled with 18F solution (21.9 kBq/mL) for 10 min using a Biograph mCT scanner. The images were reconstructed using the baseline ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm and the OSEM with PSF correction model. The reconstruction parameters included a pixel size of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm, 1-12 iterations, 24 subsets, and a full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the post-filter Gaussian filter of 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 mm. We compared both the maximum recovery coefficient (RCmax) and the mean recovery coefficient (RCmean) in the phantom at different diameters.RESULTS: The OSEM images had no edge artifacts, but the OSEM with PSF images had a dense edge delineating the hot phantom at diameters 10 mm or more and a dense spot at the center at diameters of 8 mm or less. The dense edge was clearly observed on images with a small pixel size, a Gaussian filter with a small FWHM, and a high number of iterations. At a phantom diameter of 6-7 mm, the RCmax for the OSEM and OSEM with PSF images was 60% and 140%, respectively (pixel size: 1.0 mm; FWHM of the Gaussian filter: 2.0 mm; iterations: 2). The RCmean of the OSEM with PSF images did not exceed 100%.CONCLUSION: PSF-based image reconstruction resulted in edge artifacts, the degree of which depends on the pixel size, number of iterations, FWHM of the Gaussian filter, and object size.

U2 - 10.22038/aojnmb.2017.8802

DO - 10.22038/aojnmb.2017.8802

M3 - Article

C2 - 28660224

VL - 5

SP - 134

EP - 143

JO - Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology

JF - Asia Oceania journal of nuclear medicine & biology

SN - 2322-5718

IS - 2

ER -