2014
DOI: 10.1007/s12149-014-0815-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance measurement of PSF modeling reconstruction (True X) on Siemens Biograph TruePoint TrueV PET/CT

Abstract: This study assessed the performance of the True X reconstruction. Spatial resolution with True X reconstruction was improved by 45 % and its % contrast was significantly improved compared to those with the conventional OSEM without PSF modeling reconstruction algorithm. The noise level was higher than that with the other reconstruction algorithm. Therefore, True X reconstruction should be used with caution when quantifying PET data.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

3
41
1
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
3
41
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Increasing the number of iterations provides a higher contrast, but at the cost of higher noise [11,23]. However, higher iterations would allow for a more accurate quantification of the standardized uptake value (SUV), which is desired in clinical imaging, especially when following up oncological patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Increasing the number of iterations provides a higher contrast, but at the cost of higher noise [11,23]. However, higher iterations would allow for a more accurate quantification of the standardized uptake value (SUV), which is desired in clinical imaging, especially when following up oncological patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Owing to their somewhat slow convergence in cold regions and close to hot objects [20], OSEM algorithms are challenged with increasing image noise per iteration and subset [14,17,21], especially in systems using TOF [22]. Thus, improvement of contrast with a higher number of iterations will result in higher noise [11,23]. This constitutes a limitation for clinical image reading, and for lesion quantification and lesion detection properties.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rajaram et al, in their 2D PET/CT study evaluating the impact of emission-transmission misregistration on myocardial blood flow quantification, artificially created 5-and 10-mm misregistrations along both the x-axis (left) and the z-axis (cranial) such that the lung parenchyma in CT overlapped the anterior and lateral LV walls in PET (6). PET/CT systems with 3D OSEM combined with TOF and PSF modeling have been shown to significantly improve PET image quality (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(22)(23)(24)(25)(26). However, it is still unknown whether the influence of PET/CT misregistration on myocardial uptake is greater for 3D PET/CT than for 2D PET/CT.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Image reconstruction using 3D ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) improves both spatial resolution and contrast-to-noise ratio in comparison with filtered backprojection reconstruction (10)(11)(12). In addition, recent 3D PET/CT scanners use time-of-flight (TOF) and point-spread-function (PSF) modeling, further improving spatial resolution, signal-to-noise ratio, and contrastto-noise ratio (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18). Therefore, cardiac PET/CT using 3D OSEM combined with TOF and PSF modeling might be more susceptible than conventional 2D PET/CT to misregistration between PET-emission and CT-attenuation images, potentially affecting the accuracy with which myocardial uptake is estimated.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to TOF, reconstruction techniques using the point spread function (PSF) improve image quality. 3D PET reconstruction with PSF modeling shows improvement of spatial resolution by 45% and contrast by 10% [7]. On the same hand, comparison of PSF with non-PSF images showed a mean bias up to 12% for SUVmax, 8% for SUVmean, and 7,5% for SUVpeak [8].…”
Section: Influence Of Tof and Psf In Imagingmentioning
confidence: 93%