Filtering in SPECT Image Reconstruction.

Department of Radiology, Radiation Physics Unit, University of Athens, 76, Vas. Sophias Ave., Athens 11528, Greece.
International Journal of Biomedical Imaging 01/2011; 2011:693795. DOI: 10.1155/2011/693795
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging is widely implemented in nuclear medicine as its clinical role in the diagnosis and management of several diseases is, many times, very helpful (e.g., myocardium perfusion imaging). The quality of SPECT images are degraded by several factors such as noise because of the limited number of counts, attenuation, or scatter of photons. Image filtering is necessary to compensate these effects and, therefore, to improve image quality. The goal of filtering in tomographic images is to suppress statistical noise and simultaneously to preserve spatial resolution and contrast. The aim of this work is to describe the most widely used filters in SPECT applications and how these affect the image quality. The choice of the filter type, the cut-off frequency and the order is a major problem in clinical routine. In many clinical cases, information for specific parameters is not provided, and findings cannot be extrapolated to other similar SPECT imaging applications. A literature review for the determination of the mostly used filters in cardiac, brain, bone, liver, kidneys, and thyroid applications is also presented. As resulting from the overview, no filter is perfect, and the selection of the proper filters, most of the times, is done empirically. The standardization of image-processing results may limit the filter types for each SPECT examination to certain few filters and some of their parameters. Standardization, also, helps in reducing image processing time, as the filters and their parameters must be standardised before being put to clinical use. Commercial reconstruction software selections lead to comparable results interdepartmentally. The manufacturers normally supply default filters/parameters, but these may not be relevant in various clinical situations. After proper standardisation, it is possible to use many suitable filters or one optimal filter.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Renal cortical scintigraphy with technetium-99m (Tc-99m) dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA) is the method of choice to detect acute pyelonephritis and cortical scarring. Different acquisition methods have been used: Planar parallel-hole or pinhole collimation and single photon emission tomography (SPECT). This study compared planar parallel-hole cortical scintigraphy and dual-head SPECT for detection of cortical defects. We retrospectively reviewed 190 consecutive patients with 380 kidneys and 200 DMSA scans referred to rule out renal cortical scarring. The diagnoses were 52 vesicoureteric reflux, 61 recurrent urinary tract infection, 39 hydronephrosis, 20 renal impairment, and 18 hypertension. All patients were imaged 3 h after injection of Tc-99m DMSA with SPECT and planar imaging (posterior, anterior, left, and right posterior oblique views). For each patient, planar and SPECT images were evaluated at different sittings, in random order. Each kidney was divided into three cortical segments (upper, middle and lower) and was scored as normal or reduced uptake. The linear correlation coefficient for the number of abnormal segments detected between planner and SPECT techniques was calculated. From 200 DMSA scans, 100 scans were positive for scar in SPECT images, from which only 95 scans were positive for scar in planner imaging. Out of the five mismatched scans, three scans were for patients with renal impairment and high background activity and two scans were for very small scars. No significant difference was seen in the average number of abnormal segments detected by planar versus SPECT imaging (P = 0.31). The average correlation coefficient between was high (r = 0.91 - 0.92). Tc-99m DMSA renal cortical scanning using SPECT offers no statistically significant diagnostic advantage over multiple views planar imaging for detection of cortical defect.
    Indian journal of nuclear medicine : IJNM : the official journal of the Society of Nuclear Medicine, India. 01/2015; 30(1):26-30.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Due to low counts in an 111In single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) scan, a large part of the head was missing in the reconstructed images on Philips Extended Brilliance Workspace (EBW) and IntelliSpace Portal (ISP) workstations. This problem occurred for the ordered subsets expectation maximization (OSEM) algorithm with and without resolution recovery (Astonish), but not for filtered backprojection (FBP) or maximum likelihood expectation maximization (MLEM). There were also underflow problems because the images are stored as integers resulting in a loss of intensity resolution and color banding. Philips EBW2.0 and ISP5.02 workstations upscale low-count images, but the result is not always optimal, for example, in the case of low counts in one part and more counts in another part of an image. On these workstations, the missing head artefact problem could be resolved by applying a Hann pre-filter (with a cutoff at the Nyquist frequency, which only influences the filtering) in the reconstruction process. Upscaling of the projection data prior to reconstruction did not recover the head in the images, neither did limiting the reconstructed volume to the low-count part of interest. Underflow problems were partially solved by the new version 2.0 of the Philips EBW and ISP stations, although situations could arise where underflow still poses a problem. A solution for the underflow problems is to upscale the raw projection data before reconstruction. While this results in a pure upscaling of the FBP reconstruction, the effect in iterative statistical reconstruction is not only upscaling of the intensities because the assumption of Poisson statistics of the data is violated. However, the influence of this last matter seems limited. Reconstruction of studies with low counts in relevant areas should be performed with care. Reconstruction artefacts and scaling issues can easily arise.
    EJNMMI Physics. 09/2014; 1(10).
  • Source
    A Technologist´s Guide - Myocardial Perfusion Imaging (Revised), 1 edited by Helen Ryder, Giorgio Testanera, Vanessa Veloso Jerónimo, Borut Vidovic, 10/2014: chapter Chapter 8 - Image Processing and Software: pages 32; EANM., ISBN: 978-3-902785-09-1

Full-text (4 Sources)

Available from
May 28, 2014