Quantitative comparison of analytic and iterative reconstruction methods in 2- and 3-dimensional dynamic cardiac 18F-FDG PET

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 45, Issue 12, 2004, Pages 2008-2015

  Lubberink, Mark ^a   Boellaard, Ronald ^a   Van Der Weerdt, Arno P ^a   Visser, Frans C ^a   Lammertsma, Adriaan A ^a  

^a VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

18F FDG; Cardiac PET; Iterative reconstruction; Quantification

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD SAMPLING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HEART MUSCLE; HEART SCINTISCANNING; HUMAN; MALE; MYOCARDIAL DISEASE; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; ALGORITHM; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HEART; IMAGE PROCESSING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; SCINTISCANNING;

AGED; ALGORITHMS; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HEART; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

EID: 16644381259     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Lartizien C, Kinahan PE, Swensson R, et al. Evaluating image reconstruction methods for tumor detection in 3-dimensional whole-body PET oncology imaging. J Nucl Med. 2003;44:276-290.
2. Raylman RR, Kison PV, Wahl RL. Capabilities of two- and three-dimensional FDG-PET for detecting small lesions and lymph nodes in the upper torso: a dynamic phantom study. Eur J Nucl Med. 1999;26:39-45.
3. Kadrmas DJ, Christian PE, Wollenweber SD, Kohlmyer SG, Stearns CW. Comparative evaluation of 2D and 3D lesion detectability on a full-ring BGO PET scanner [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2002;43(suppl):56P.
4. Hsu CH. A study of lesion contrast recovery for iterative PET image reconstructions versus filtered backprojection using an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 2002;26:119-127.
5. 18F]FDG PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:1326-1335.
6. 15O]water PET activation studies using statistical parametric mapping analysis. Neuroimage. 2003;19:1170-1179.
7. Boellaard R, van Lingen A, Lammertsma AA. Experimental and clinical evaluation of iterative reconstruction (OSEM) in dynamic PET: quantitative characteristics and effects on kinetic modeling. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:808-817.
8. Katoh C, Ruotsalainen U, Laine H, et al. Iterative reconstruction based on median root prior in quantification of myocardial blood flow and oxygen metabolism. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:862-867.
9. Bloomfield PM, Myers R, Hume SP, et al. Three-dimensional performance of a small-diameter positron emission tomograph. Phys Med Biol. 1997;42:389-400.
10. Dhawan V, Kazumata K, Robeson W, et al. Quantitative brain PET: comparison of 2D and 3D acquisitions on the GE Advance scanner. Clin Positron Imaging. 1998;1:135-144.
11. Riddell C, Carson RE, Carrasquillo JA, et al. Noise reduction in oncology FDG PET images by iterative reconstruction: a quantitative assessment. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1316-1323.
12. Sossi V, Oakes TR, Chan GLY, Schulzer M, Ruth TJ. Quantitative comparison of three- and two-dimensional PET with human brain studies. J Nucl Med. 1998;39:1714-1719.
13. Sossi V, Oakes TR, Ruth TJ. A phantom study evaluating the quantitative aspect of 3D PET imaging of the brain. Phys Med Biol. 1998;43:2615-2630.
14. Lartizien C, Comtat C, Kinahan PE, et al. Optimization of injected dose based on noise equivalent count rates for 2- and 3-dimensional whole-body PET. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1268-1278.
15. 15O and 3-dimensional PET: an experimental validation. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1031-1040.
16. Brink I, Schumacher T, Talazko J, et al. 3D-cardiac-PET: a recommendable clinical alternative to 2D-cardiac-PET? Clin Positron Imaging. 1999;2:191-196.
17. Votaw JR, White M. Comparison of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional cardiac Rb-82 PET studies. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:701-706.
18. Watson CC, Newport D, Casey ME, et al. Evaluation of simulation-based scatter correction for 3-D PET cardiac imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:90-97.
19. Ollinger JM. Model-based scatter correction for fully 3D PET. Phys Med Biol. 1996;41:153-176.
20. Weinberg IN, Huang SC, Hoffman EJ, et al. Validation of PET-acquired input functions for cardiac studies. J Nucl Med. 1988;29:241-247.
21. Choi Y, Hawkins RA, Huang SC, et al. Parametric images of myocardial metabolic-rate of glucose generated from dynamic cardiac PET and 2-[F-18]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose studies. J Nucl Med. 1991;32:733-738.
22. Gambhir SS, Schwaiger M, Huang SC, et al. Simple noninvasive quantification method for measuring myocardial glucose-utilization in humans employing positron emission tomography and F-18 deoxyglucose. J Nucl Med. 1989;30:359-366.
23. Ohtake T, Kosaka N, Watanabe T, et al. Noninvasive method to obtain input function for measuring tissue glucose-utilization of thoracic and abdominal organs. J Nucl Med. 1991;32:1432-1438.
24. van der Weerdt AP, Klein LJ, Boellaard R, et al. Image-derived input functions for determination of MRGlu in cardiac F-18-FDG PET scans. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1622-1629.
25. Hove JD, Iida H, Kofoed KF, et al. Left atrial versus left ventricular input function for quantification of the myocardial blood flow with nitrogen-13 ammonia and positron emission tomography. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2004;31:71-76.
26. Adam LE, Zaers J, Ostertag H, et al. Performance evaluation of the whole-body PET scanner ECAT EXACT HR+ following the IEC standard. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1997;44:1172-1179.
27. Brix G, Zaers J, Adam LE, et al. Performance evaluation of a whole-body PET scanner using the NEMA protocol. J Nucl Med. 1997;38:1614-1623.
28. Bergström M, Eriksson L, Bohm C, Blomqvist G, Litton J. Correction for scattered radiation in a ring detector positron camera by integral transformation of the projections. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1983;7:42-50.
29. Watson CC. New, faster, image-based scatter correction for 3D PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2000;47:1587-1594.
30. Boellaard R, van der Weerdt AP, Visser FC, Lammertsma AA. Evaluation of 2D and 3D FDG cardiac PET studies using dynamic scans with alternating 2D and 3D frames [abstract]. J Nucl Med. 2003;44(suppl):269P.
31. Defrise M, Kinahan PE, Townsend DW, et al. Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3-D PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 1997;16:145-158.
32. Comtat C, Kinahan PE, Defrise M, Michel C, Townsend DW. Fast reconstruction of 3D PET data with accurate statistical modeling. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1998;45:1083-1089.
33. Boellaard R, Van Lingen A, van Balen SCM, Hoving BG, Lammertsma AA. Characteristics of a new fully programmable blood sampling device for monitoring blood radioactivity during PET. Eur J Nucl Med. 2001;28:81-89.
34. Patlak CS, Blasberg RG, Fenstermacher JD. Graphical evaluation of blood-to-brain transfer constants from multiple-time uptake data. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 1983;3:1-7.
35. 14C]deoxyglucose method for the measurement of local cerebral glucose utilization: theory, procedure, and normal values in the conscious and anesthetized albino rat. J Neurochem. 1977;28:897-916.
36. Huang SC, Phelps ME, Hoffman EJ, et al. Noninvasive determination of local cerebral metabolic rate of glucose in man. Am J Physiol. 1980;238:E69-E82.
37. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307-310.
38. 76Br with 2D and 3D PET. Phys Med Biol. 2002;47:3519-3534.