PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 11, 2016Physics in Medicine and Biology95 citations

On the assessment of spatial resolution of PET systems with iterative image reconstruction

View Full Paper
KGKuang GongSCSimon R. CherryJQJinyi Qi

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Spatial resolution is an important metric for performance characterization in PET systems. Measuring spatial resolution is straightforward with a linear reconstruction algorithm, such as filtered backprojection, and can be performed by reconstructing a point source scan and calculating the full-width-at-half-maximum (FWHM) along the principal directions. With the widespread adoption of iterative reconstruction methods, it is desirable to quantify the spatial resolution using an iterative reconstruction algorithm. However, the task can be difficult because the reconstruction algorithms are nonlinear and the non-negativity constraint can artificially enhance the apparent spatial resolution if a point source image is reconstructed without any background. Thus, it was recommended that a background should be added to the point source data before reconstruction for resolution measurement. However, there has been no detailed study on the effect of the point source contrast on the measured spatial resolution. Here we use point source scans from a preclinical PET scanner to investigate the relationship between measured spatial resolution and the point source contrast. We also evaluate whether the reconstruction of an isolated point source is predictive of the ability of the system to resolve two adjacent point sources. Our results indicate that when the point source contrast is below a certain threshold, the measured FWHM remains stable. Once the contrast is above the threshold, the measured FWHM monotonically decreases with increasing point source contrast. In addition, the measured FWHM also monotonically decreases with iteration number for maximum likelihood estimate. Therefore, when measuring system resolution with an iterative reconstruction algorithm, we recommend using a low-contrast point source and a fixed number of iterations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gong et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69da671f0d540cafc583903dhttps://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/61/5/n193
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The convergence of object dependent resolution in maximum likelihood based tomographic image reconstruction1993 · 114 citations
  2. 2Effects of Image Characteristics on Performance of Tumor Delineation Methods: A Test–Retest Assessment2011 · 66 citations
  3. 3Gap-Filling for the High-Resolution PET Sinograms With a Dedicated DCT-Domain Filter2010 · 43 citations
  4. 4PET optimization for improved assessment and accurate quantification of 90 Y‐microsphere biodistribution after radioembolization2014 · 34 citations
  5. 5In vivo Validation of Reconstruction-Based Resolution Recovery for Human Brain Studies2009 · 30 citations