Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of sigmoidal optimization to reconstruct nuclear medicine image: Comparison with filtered back projection and iterative reconstruction method

  • Shin, Han-Back (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Moo-Sub (Department of Biomedical Engineering and Research Institute of Biomedical, Engineering, College of Medicine, Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Law, Martin (Proton Therapy Pte Ltd) ;
  • Djeng, Shih-Kien (Proton Therapy Pte Ltd) ;
  • Choi, Min-Geon (Department of Biomedical Engineering and Research Institute of Biomedical, Engineering, College of Medicine, Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Choi, Byung Wook (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, Catholic University of Daegu School of Medicine) ;
  • Kang, Sungmin (Department of Nuclear Medicine, Daegu Catholic University Medical Center, Catholic University of Daegu School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Dong-Wook (Department of Radiation Oncology, Yonsei Cancer Center, Yonsei University, College of Medicine) ;
  • Suh, Tae Suk (Department of Biomedical Engineering and Research Institute of Biomedical, Engineering, College of Medicine, Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Yoon, Do-Kun (Department of Biomedical Engineering and Research Institute of Biomedical, Engineering, College of Medicine, Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2020.03.18
  • Accepted : 2020.06.24
  • Published : 2021.01.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

High levels for noise and a loss of true signal make the quantitative interpretation of nuclear medicine (NM) images difficult. An application of profile optimization using a sigmoidal function in this study was used to acquire the NM images with high quality. And the images were acquired by using three kinds of reconstruction method using each same sinogram: a standard filtered back-projection (FBP), an iterative reconstruction (IR) technique, and the sigmoidal function profile optimization (SFPO). Comparison of image according to reconstruction method was performed to show a superiority of the SFPO for imaging. The images reconstructed by using the SFPO showed an average of 1.49 times and of 1.17 times better in contrast than the results obtained using the standard FBP and the IR technique, respectively. Higher signal to noise ratios were obtained as an average of 12.30 times and of 3.77 times than results obtained using the standard FBP and the IR technique, respectively. This study confirms that reconstruction with SFPO (vs FBP and vs IR) can lead to better lesion detectability and characterization with noise reduction. It can be developed for future reconstruction technique for the NM imaging.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by Radiation Technology Research and Development program (Grant No. 2017M2A2A7A01070973) through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).

References

  1. L. Hongbo, W. Kun, T. Jie, Postreconstruction filtering of 3D PET images by using weighted higher order singular value decomposition, Biomed. Eng. Online 15 (2016) 102. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-016-0221-y
  2. S. Cherry, J. Sorenson, M. Phelps, Physics in Nuclear Medicine, Elsevier Health Sciences, 2012.
  3. M. Law, C. Tang, Capability of 3D ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstruction algorithm in performing half-time myocardial perfusion imaging studies, in: Radiological Society of North America, USA, Nov 30 - Dec 5, 2014.
  4. P. Bruyant, Analytic and iterative reconstruction algorithms in SPECT, J. Nucl. Med. 43 (2002) 1343-1358.
  5. O. Grosser, D. Kupitz, J. Ruf, et al., Optimization of SPECT-CT hybrid imaging using iterative image reconstruction for low-dose CT: a phantom study, PloS One 10 (2015), e0138658. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138658
  6. D. Yang, D. Xing, H. Gu, Y. Tan, L. Zeng, Fast multielement phase-controlled photoacoustic imaging based on limited-field-filtered back-projection algorithm, Appl. Phys. Lett. 87 (2005) 194101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2119417
  7. C. Floyd, R. Jaszczak, R. Coleman, Inverse Monte Carlo: a unified reconstruction algorithm for SPECT, IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 32 (1985) 779-785. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNS.1985.4336940
  8. H. Liu, M. Guo, Z. Hu, P. Shi, H. Hu, Nonlinear dual reconstruction of SPECT activity and attenuation images, PloS One 9 (2014), e106951. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0106951
  9. T. Moon, The expectation-maximization algorithm, IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 13 (1996) 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1109/79.543975
  10. X. Yu, S. Chen, Z. Hu, et al., Sparse/low rank constrained reconstruction for dynamic PET imaging, PloS One 10 (2015), e0142019. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0142019
  11. J. Cui, X. Liu, Y. Wang, H. Liu, Deep reconstruction model for dynamic PET images, PloS One 12 (2017), e0184667. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184667
  12. Y. Vardi, L. Shepp, L. Kaufman, A statistical model for positron emission tomography, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 80 (1985) 8-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1985.10477119
  13. T. Yokei, H. Shinohara, H. Onishi, Performance evaluation of OSEM reconstruction algorithm incorporating three-dimensional distance-dependent resolution compensation for brain SPECT: a simulation study, Ann. Nucl. Med. 16 (2002) 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02995286
  14. H. Hudson, R. Larkin, Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data, IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 13 (1994) 601-609. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.363108
  15. K. Lange, M. Bahn, R. Little, A theoretical study of some maximum likelihood algorithms for emission and transmission tomography, IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 6 (1987) 106-114. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.1987.4307810
  16. J. Ollinger, Maximum-likelihood reconstruction of transmission images in emission computed tomography via the EM algorithm, IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 13 (1994) 89-101. https://doi.org/10.1109/42.276147
  17. F. Beekman, H. De-Jong, S. Van-Geloven, Efficient fully 3-D iterative SPECT reconstruction with Monte Carlo-based scatter compensation, IEEE Trans. Med. Imag. 21 (2002) 867-877. https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2002.803130
  18. H. Shin, M. Kim, S. Kim, et al., Quantitative analysis of prompt gamma ray imaging during proton boron fusion therapy according to boron concentration, Oncotarget 9 (2018) 3089. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.23201
  19. D. Yoon, J. Jung, K. Hong, K. Lee, T. Suh, GPU-based prompt gamma ray imaging from boron neutron capture therapy, Med. Phys. 42 (2015) 165-169.
  20. C. Chou, Y. Dong, Y. Hung, et al., Accelerating image reconstruction in dual-head PET system by GPU and symmetry properties, PloS One 7 (2012), e50540.
  21. H. Shin, D. Yoon, J. Jung, M. Kim, T. Suh, Prompt gamma ray imaging for verification of proton boron fusion therapy: a Monte Carlo study, Phys. Med. 32 (2016) 1271-1275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.05.053
  22. N. Freedman, D. Schechter, M. Klein, et al., SPECT attenuation artifacts in normal and overweight persons: insights from a retrospective comparison of Rb-82 positron emission tomography and Tl-201 SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging, Clin. Nucl. Med. 25 (2000) 1019-1023. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003072-200012000-00014
  23. E. Garcia, SPECT attenuation correction: an essential tool to realize nuclear cardiology's manifest destiny, J. Nucl. Cardiol. 14 (2007) 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclcard.2006.12.144
  24. S. Tong, A. Alessio, P. Kinahan, Noise and signal properties in PSF-based fully 3D PET image reconstruction: an experimental evaluation, Phys. Med. Biol. 55 (2010) 1453. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/5/013
  25. P. Zanzonico, An Overview of Nuclear Imaging, Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry, 2019.
  26. K. Hong, Y. Choi, J. Jung, et al., A prototype MR insertable brain PET using tileable GAPD arrays, Med. Phys. 40 (2013), 042503. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4793754
  27. L. Qin, H. Li, S. Lu, D. Ding, G. Ren, Growth and characteristics of LYSO (Lu2(1_x_y)Y2xSiO5: cey) scintillation crystals, J. Cryst. Growth 281 (2) (2005) 518-524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2005.04.057
  28. A. Gaitanis, G. Kontaxakis, G. Spyrou, et al., Studying the properties of the updating coefficients in the OSEM algorithm for iterative image reconstruction in PET, Comput. Methods Progr. Biomed. 99 (2010) 219-229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2009.11.011
  29. P. Slomka, T. Pan, D. Berman, G. Germano, Advances in SPECT and PET hardware, Prog. Cardiovasc. Dis. 57 (2015) 566-578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pcad.2015.02.002
  30. H. Shin, H. Sheen, H. Lee, et al., Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM) information conversion procedure for SUV calculation of PET scanners with different DICOM header information, Phys. Med. 44 (2017) 243-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.05.063
  31. A. Fogliata, R. Garcia, T. Knoos, et al., Definition of parameters for quality assurance of flattening filter free (FFF) photon beams in radiation therapy, Med. Phys. 39 (2012) 6455-6464. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4754799
  32. S. Lebron, B. Lu, G. Yan, et al., Parameterization of photon beam dosimetry for a linear accelerator, Med. Phys. 43 (2016) 748-760.
  33. Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, G. Hinton, Deep learning, Nature 521 (2015) 436-444. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14539
  34. D. Silver, J. Schrittwieser, K. Simonyan, et al., Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge, Nature 550 (2017) 354. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24270
  35. J. Nuyts, S. Stroobants, P. Dupont, et al., Reducing loss of image quality because of the attenuation artifact in uncorrected PET whole-body images, J. Nucl. Med. 43 (2002) 1054-1062.
  36. I. Haggstrom, C. Schmidtlein, G.Campanella T. Fuchs, DeepPET: a deep encoder-decoder network for directly solving the PET image reconstruction inverse problem, Med. Image Anal. 54 (2019) 253-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2019.03.013