Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2009 Apr;28(4):523-34. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2008.2006520. Epub 2008 Oct 3.

Experimental comparison of lesion detectability for four fully-3D PET reconstruction schemes.

Author information

  • 1Department of Radiology, Utah Center for Advanced Imaging Research, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84108 USA. kadrmas@ucair.med.utah.edu

Abstract

The objective of this work was to evaluate the lesion detection performance of four fully-3D positron emission tomography (PET) reconstruction schemes using experimentally acquired data. A multi-compartment anthropomorphic phantom was set up to mimic whole-body (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) cancer imaging and scanned 12 times in 3D mode, obtaining count levels typical of noisy clinical scans. Eight of the scans had 26 (68)Ge "shell-less" lesions (6, 8-, 10-, 12-, 16-mm diameter) placed throughout the phantom with various target:background ratios. This provided lesion-present and lesion-absent datasets with known truth appropriate for evaluating lesion detectability by localization receiver operating characteristic (LROC) methods. Four reconstruction schemes were studied: 1) Fourier rebinning (FORE) followed by 2D attenuation-weighted ordered-subsets expectation-maximization, 2) fully-3D AW-OSEM, 3) fully-3D ordinary-Poisson line-of-response (LOR-)OSEM; and 4) fully-3D LOR-OSEM with an accurate point-spread function (PSF) model. Two forms of LROC analysis were performed. First, a channelized nonprewhitened (CNPW) observer was used to optimize processing parameters (number of iterations, post-reconstruction filter) for the human observer study. Human observers then rated each image and selected the most-likely lesion location. The area under the LROC curve ( A(LROC)) and the probability of correct localization were used as figures-of-merit. The results of the human observer study found no statistically significant difference between FORE and AW-OSEM3D ( A(LROC)=0.41 and 0.36, respectively), an increase in lesion detection performance for LOR-OSEM3D ( A(LROC)=0.45, p=0.076), and additional improvement with the use of the PSF model ( A(LROC)=0.55, p=0.024). The numerical CNPW observer provided the same rankings among algorithms, but obtained different values of A(LROC). These results show improved lesion detection performance for the reconstruction algorithms with more sophisticated statistical and imaging models as compared to the previous-generation algorithms.

PMID:
19272998
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC2798572
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk