skip to main content

SciTech ConnectSciTech Connect

Title: SU-E-QI-03: Compartment Modeling of Dynamic Brain PET - The Effect of Scatter and Random Corrections On Parameter Errors

Purpose: To investigate the effects of corrections for random and scattered coincidences on kinetic parameters in brain tumors, by using ten Monte Carlo (MC) simulated dynamic FLT-PET brain scans. Methods: The GATE MC software was used to simulate ten repetitions of a 1 hour dynamic FLT-PET scan of a voxelized head phantom. The phantom comprised six normal head tissues, plus inserted regions for blood and tumor tissue. Different time-activity-curves (TACs) for all eight tissue types were used in the simulation and were generated in Matlab using a 2-tissue model with preset parameter values (K1,k2,k3,k4,Va,Ki). The PET data was reconstructed into 28 frames by both ordered-subset expectation maximization (OSEM) and 3D filtered back-projection (3DFBP). Five image sets were reconstructed, all with normalization and different additional corrections C (A=attenuation, R=random, S=scatter): Trues (AC), trues+randoms (ARC), trues+scatters (ASC), total counts (ARSC) and total counts (AC). Corrections for randoms and scatters were based on real random and scatter sinograms that were back-projected, blurred and then forward projected and scaled to match the real counts. Weighted non-linearleast- squares fitting of TACs from the blood and tumor regions was used to obtain parameter estimates. Results: The bias was not significantly different for trues (AC), trues+randoms (ARC),more » trues+scatters (ASC) and total counts (ARSC) for either 3DFBP or OSEM (p<0.05). Total counts with only AC stood out however, with an up to 160% larger bias. In general, there was no difference in bias found between 3DFBP and OSEM, except in parameter Va and Ki. Conclusion: According to our results, the methodology of correcting the PET data for randoms and scatters performed well for the dynamic images where frames have much lower counts compared to static images. Generally, no bias was introduced by the corrections and their importance was emphasized since omitting them increased bias extensively.« less
; ;  [1] ;  [2]
  1. Umeå University, Umeå (Sweden)
  2. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, NY, NY (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 41; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States