Combination of compressed sensing-based iterative reconstruction and offset acquisition for I-123 FP-CIT SPECT: a simulation study.

Asia Ocean J Nucl Med Biol

Department of Medical Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan.

Published: January 2022

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to validate a new method for improving SPECT imaging using compressed sensing (CS) with offset acquisition to enhance image quality and accuracy.
  • Various reconstruction techniques were compared, showing that CS-IR with offset acquisition maintained high image quality even with fewer projections, while traditional methods like ML-EM suffered in performance.
  • The findings suggest that CS-IR with offset acquisition could lead to quicker SPECT scans without sacrificing image quality, benefiting both patients and imaging accuracy.

Article Abstract

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to validate undersampled single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging using a combination of compressed sensing (CS) iterative reconstruction (CS-IR) and offset acquisition.

Methods: Three types of numerical phantoms were used to evaluate image quality and quantification derived from CS with offset acquisition. SPECT images were reconstructed using filtered back-projection (FBP), maximum likelihood-expectation maximization (ML-EM), CS-IR, and CS-IR with offset acquisition. The efficacy of CS-IR with offset acquisition was examined in terms of spatial resolution, aspect ratio (ASR), activity concentration linearity, contrast, percent coefficient of variation (%CV), and specific binding ratio (SBR).

Results: The full widths at half maximum remained unchanged as the number of projections decreased in CS-IR with offset acquisition. Changes in ASRs and linearities of count density were observed for ML-EM and CS-IR from undersampled projections. The %CV obtained by CS-IR with offset acquisition was substantially lower than that obtained by ML-EM and CS-IR. There were no significant differences between the %CVs obtained from 60 projections by CS-IR with offset acquisition and from 120 projections by FBP. Although the SBRs for CS-IR with offset acquisition tended to be slightly lower than for FBP, the SBRs for CS-IR with offset acquisition did not change with the number of projections.

Conclusions: CS-IR with offset acquisition can provide good image quality and quantification compared with a commonly used SPECT reconstruction method, especially from undersampled projection data. Our proposed method could shorten overall SPECT acquisition times, which would benefit patients and enable quantification with dynamic SPECT acquisitions.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9205842PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.22038/AOJNMB.2021.59585.1417DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

offset acquisition
40
cs-ir offset
36
cs-ir
12
ml-em cs-ir
12
offset
11
acquisition
11
combination compressed
8
iterative reconstruction
8
image quality
8
quality quantification
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!