[P094] Performance evaluation of point spread function reconstruction algorithm on a new PET-TC TOF scanner. (August 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Poli, Matteo; Richetta, Elisa; Cutaia, Claudia; Pasquino, Massimo; Garnero, Enrico; Pellerito, Riccardo Emanuele; Stasi, Michele
• Is Part Of: Physica medica. Volume 52(2018)Supplement 1
• Page Start: 128
• Publication Date: 2018-08
• Subjects: Medical physics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Imagerie médicale -- Périodiques; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Rayons X -- Sécurité -- Mesures -- Périodiques; Physique -- Périodiques; Médecine -- Périodiques; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2018.06.414
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1120-1797

Abstract

Abstract : Purpose: Aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of PSF reconstruction algorithm of a new PET-TC TOF scanner. Comparison in term of image quality was performed in order to investigate potentialities and differences between PSF algorithm and the standard OSEM algorithm routinely applied in the clinical use. Methods: The phantom NEMA 2012 Body Image Quality (18 F, 213 kBq/ml, diameter 10 mm, 13 mm, 17 mm and 22 mm hot spheres (background ratio 4 ÷ 1), diameter 28 mm and 37 mm cold spheres) was acquired with Philips Ingenuity TF PET-TC scanner (TOF, AC-SC). Raw data were reconstructed both with standard OSEM 3D and with PSF, using 20 different paired iteration values (1–500) and regularization levels (1–20). Seven regions of interest (ROIs) were contoured: 4 centered on "hot" spheres, 2 on "cold" spheres and 1 on background. Mean value (MV) and standard deviation (SD) of every ROI were calculated: signal to noise ratio (SNR) and contrast to noise ratio (CNR) were compared. Spatial resolution was evaluated as steep of the 10 mm-sphere profile. Results: PSF images showed resolution higher (e.g. 3 mm for 30 iterations) than the standard OSEM (6 mm). The more iteration number the higher artifacts presence, especially in the background region. MV and SD values relative to the "hot spheres" strongly depend on iteration number and regularization level; variations up to +1000% were found (500 iterations and 20 regularization) both on MV and SD values. No variations were noticed on background MV, but SD values increase up to +600%. As consequence SNR and CNR are strongly affected by reconstruction parameters. Conclusions: PSF images showed resolution higher than standard OSEM, but also huge artifacts and unacceptable variations in measured activity (and SUV). The use of PSF reconstruction for quantitative purposes is not recommended and its use should be designed for specific uses.