High resolution reconstruction of PET images using the iterative OSEM algorithm;Auflösungsverbessernde rekonstruktion von PET-bildern mit dem iterativen OSEM-algorithmus

NuklearMedizin

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 72-78

  Doll, Josef ^a   Henze, M ^a   Bublitz, O ^a   Werling, A ^a   Adam, L E ^a,b   Haberkorn, U ^a   Semmler, W ^a   Brix, G ^c  

^a GERMAN CANCER RESEARCH CENTER DKFZ   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c BUNDESAMT FÜR STRAHLENSCHUTZ   (Germany)

Author keywords

3D data acquisition; Image reconstruction; OSEM algorithm; Positron emission tomogrophy; Resolution

Indexed keywords

GERMANIUM; DIAGNOSTIC AGENT; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18; RADIOPHARMACEUTICAL AGENT;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BRAIN DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FOURIER ANALYSIS; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE DISPLAY; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; NOISE; OSEM ALGORITHM; PERFORMANCE; PHANTOM; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY;

ALGORITHMS; FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F18; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; TOMOGRAPHY, EMISSION-COMPUTED;

EID: 3042574892     PISSN: 00295566     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1625594     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. 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: 1172-9.
2. Andrews HC, Hunt BR. Digital image restoration. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall 1977.
3. 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: 1614-23.
4. Brix G, Doll J, Bellemann ME et al. Use of scanner characteristics in iterative image reconstruction for high-resolution positron emission tomography studies of small animals. Eur J Nucl Med 1997; 24: 779-86.
5. Defrise M. A factorization method for the 3D X-ray transform. Inverse Problems 1995; 11: 983-94.
6. Defrise M, Kinahan PE, Townsend DW et al. Exact and approximate rebinning algorithms for 3D-PET data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1997; 16: 145-58.
7. Derenzo SE. Mathematical removal of positron range blurring in high resolution tomography. IEEE trans Nucl Sci 1986; 33: 565-9.
8. Doll J, Zairs J, Trojan H et al. Optimierung der Bildqualität von PET-Aufnahmen durch 3D-Datenakquisition und iterative Bildrekonstruktion. Nuklearmedizin 1998; 37: 62-7.
9. Hoffmann EJ, Huang SC, Phelps ME. Quantitation in positron emission computed tomography. 1. Effect of object size. J Comput Assist Tomogr 1979, 3: 299-308.
10. Hudson HM, Larkin RS. Accelerated image reconstruction using ordered subsets of projection data. IEEE Trans Med Image 1994, 13, 68-78.
11. Huesman RH, Salmeron EM, Baker JR. Compensation for crystal penetration in high resolution positron tomography. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1989; 36: 1084-9.
12. Jansson PA. Deconvolution of images and spectra. London, San Diego: Academic press 1997.
13. Kaczmarz S. Angenäherte Auflösung von Systemen linearer Gleichungen. Bull Int Acad Pol Sci Lett 1937, 35, 335-57.
14. Kamphuis C, Beekman FJ, Viergever MA et al. Accelerated fully 3D SPECT reconstruction using dual matrix ordered subsets. J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 6P.
15. Liang Z. Detector response restoration in image reconstruction of high resolution positron emission tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1994; 13: 314-21.
16. Luig H, Eschner W, Bähre M et al. Eine iterative Strategie zur Bestimmung der Quellverteilung bei der Einzelphotonen-Tomographie mit einer rotierenden Gammakamera (SPECT). Nuklearmedizin 1988; 27: 140-6.
17. Moses WW, Derenzo WW. Empirical observation of performance degradation in positron emission tomographs utilizing block detectors. J Nucl Med 1993; 34; 101P.
18. Moses WW, Virador PRG, Derenzo WW et al. Design of a high-resolution, high-sensitive PET camera for human brains and small animals. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1997; 44: 1487-91.
19. Schmidlin P, Bellemann ME, Brix G. Subsets and overrelaxation in image reconstruction. Phys Med Biol 1999; 44: 1385-96.
20. Shepp L, Vardi Y. Maximum likelihood reconstruction for emission tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1982; 1: 113-22.
21. Vardi Y, Shepp LA, Kaufman L. A statistical model for positron emission tomography. J Am Stat Assoc 1985; 80: 8-20.
22. Webb S. The mathematics of image formation and image processing. In: Webb S (ed). The physics of medical imaging. Bristol, Philadelphia: Institute of Physics Publishing 1988, 534-66.
23. Webb S, Long AP, Ott RJ et al. Constrained deconvolution of SPECT liver tomograms by direct digital image restoration. Med Phys 1985; 12: 53-8.
24. Webb S. Comparison of data-processing techniques for the improvement of contrast in SPET liver tomograms. Phys Med Biol 1985; 30: 1077-86.
25. Zeng GL, Gullberg GT. Valid backprojection matrices which are not the transpose of the projection matrix. J Nucl Med 1996; 37: 206P.