Improvement in PET/CT image quality with a combination of point-spread function and time-of-flight in relation to reconstruction parameters

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 53, Issue 11, 2012, Pages 1716-1722

  Akamatsu, Go ^a   Ishikawa, Kaori ^a   Mitsumoto, Katsuhiko ^a   Taniguchi, Takafumi ^a   Ohya, Nobuyoshi ^b   Baba, Shingo ^a   Abe, Koichiro ^a   Sasaki, Masayuki ^a  

^a KYUSHU UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b KYUSHU UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

Image quality; Noise equivalent counts; PET CT; Point spread function; Time of flight

Indexed keywords

FLUORODEOXYGLUCOSE F 18;

ADULT; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CANCER OF UNKNOWN PRIMARY SITE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; LUNG CANCER; LYMPHOMA; MALE; MALIGNANT MESOTHELIOMA; MATHEMATICAL PARAMETERS; NOISE; PHANTOM; POINT SPREAD FUNCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PROSTATE CANCER; RADIOACTIVITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STOMACH CANCER; THYROID CANCER; TIME OF FLIGHT; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

COLORECTAL NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MIDDLE AGED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY AND COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; QUALITY CONTROL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84868314165     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.112.103861     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Delbeke D. Oncological applications of FDG PET imaging: brain tumors, colorectal cancer, lymphoma and melanoma. J Nucl Med. 1999;40:591-603.
2. 18F-FDG PET for suspected recurrent non-small cell lung cancer after potentially curative therapy: impact on management and prognostic stratification. J Nucl Med. 2001;42:1605-1613.
3. Oyen WJ, Bussink J, Verhagen AF, Corstens FH, Bootsma GP. Role of FDG-PET in the diagnosis and management of lung cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2004;4:561-567.
4. Vansteenkiste J, Fischer BM, Dooms C, Mortensen J. Positron-emission tomography in prognostic and therapeutic assessment of lung cancer: systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5:531-540.
5. 18F-FDG PET in oncology. J Nucl Med. 2009;49:480-508.
6. 18F]fluoro-2-deoxyglucose activity. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;77:350-356.
7. Halpern BS, Dahlbom M, Quon A, et al. Impact of patient weight and emission scan duration on PET/CT image quality and lesion detectability. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:797-801.
8. Tong S, Alessio AM, Kinahan PE. Noise and signal properties in PSF-based fully 3D PET image reconstruction: an experimental evaluation. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:1453-1473.
9. Alessio AM, Stearns CW, Tong S, et al. Application and evaluation of a measured spatially variant system model for PET image reconstruction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2010;29:938-949.
10. Surti S, Karp JS, Popescu LM, Daube-Witherspoon ME,Werner M. Investigation of time-of-flight benefit for fully 3-D PET. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006; 25:529-538.
11. Panin VY, Kehren F, Michel C, Casey M. Fully 3-D PET reconstruction with system matrix derived from point source measurements. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2006;25:907-921.
12. Anger HO. Survey of radioisotope cameras. ISA Trans. 1966;5:311-334.
13. Brownell GL, Burnham CA, Wilensky S, Aronow S, Kazemi H, Streider D. New developments in positron scintigraphy and the application of cyclotron produced positron emitters. In: Medical Radioisotope Scintigraphy. Vol 1. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1969:163-176.
14. Allemand R, Gresset C, Vacher J. Potential advantages of a cesium fluoride scintillator for a time-of-flight positron camera. J Nucl Med. 1980;21:153-155.
15. MosesWW, Derenzo SE. Prospects for time-of-flight PET using LSO scintillator. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1999;46:474-478.
16. Melcher CL, Schweither JS. Cerium-doped lutetium oxyorthosilicate: a fast, efficient new scintillator. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1992;39:502-505.
17. Daghighiam F, Shenderov P, Pentlow KS, et al. Evaluation of cerium doped lutetium oxyorthosilicate (LSO) scintillation crystal for PET. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1993;40:1045-1047.
18. Lois C, Jakoby BW, Long MJ, et al. An assessment of the impact of incorporating time-of-flight information into clinical PET/CT imaging. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:237-245.
19. Kadrmas DJ, Casey ME, Conti M, Jakoby BW, Lois C, Townsend DW. Impact of time-of-flight on PET tumor detection. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1315-1323.
20. Karp JS, Surti S, Daube-Witherspoon ME, Muehllehner G. Benefit of time-offlight in PET: experimental and clinical results. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:462-470.
21. El Fakhri G, Surti S, Trott CM, Scheuermann J, Karp JS. Improvement in lesion detection with whole-body oncologic time-of-flight PET. J Nucl Med. 2011; 52:347-353.
22. Surti S, Scheuermann J, El Fakhri G, et al. Impact of time-of-flight PET on whole-body oncologic studies: a human observer lesion detection and localization study. J Nucl Med. 2011;52:712-719.
23. Fukukita H, Senda M, Terauchi T, et al. Japanese guideline for the oncology FDG-PET/CT data acquisition protocol: synopsis of version 1.0. Ann Nucl Med. 2010;24:325-334.
24. 18F-FDG: standardized uptake values in normal tissues. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:784-788.
25. Badawi RD, Dahlbom M. NEC: some coincidences are more equivalent than others. J Nucl Med. 2005;46:1767-1768.
26. Thielemans K, Asma E, Ahn S, et al. Impact of PSF modeling on the convergence rate and edge behavior of EM images in PET. IEEE Nucl Sci Symp Conf Rec. 2010;3267-3272.
27. Bettinardi V, Presotto L, Rapisarda E, Picchio M, Gianolli L, Gilardi MC. Physical performance of the new hybrid PET/CT Discovery-690. Med Phys. 2011;38:5394-5411.
28. Conti M. Focus on time-of-flight PET: the benefits of improved time resolution. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38:1147-1157.
29. 18F-FDG PET/CT image quality. J Nucl Med Technol. 2011;39:72-76.
30. Strother SC, Casey ME, Hoffman EJ. Measuring PET scanner sensitivity: relating countrates to image signal-to-noise ratios using noise equivalent counts. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1990;37:783-788.
31. Lartizien C, Comtat C, Kinahan PE, Ferreira N, Bendriem B, Trebossen R. 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.
32. 18F-FDG PET/CT in overweight patients: optimizing scan duration versus administered dose. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:844-848.
33. Tatsumi M, Clark PA, Nakamoto Y, Wahl RL. Impact of body habitus on quantitative and qualitative image quality in whole-body FDG-PET. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:40-45.