Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23892823›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2013

Few-view single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) reconstruction based on a blurred piecewise constant object model.

Paul A Wolf, Jakob S Jørgensen, Taly G Schmidt, Emil Y Sidky

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Biodistribution and dosimetry for combined [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Do CNNs Solve the CT Inverse Problem?IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2021
    Article
  9. Virtual clinical trials in medical imaging: a review.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. On Few-View Tomography and Staircase Artifacts.IEEE transactions on nuclear science · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Paul A WolfDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Marquette University, 1515 W. Wisconsin Ave. Milwaukee, WI 53233, USA. paul.wolf@marquette.edu
Jakob S Jørgensen
Taly G Schmidt
Emil Y Sidky

Funding

Targeted Imaging in Helical Cone-Beam CTR01EB000225 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI PAN, XIAOCHUAN · 2002 to 2014
$3.5M
Optimized Cone-Beam CT for Image-Guided Radiation TherapyR01CA120540 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI PAN, XIAOCHUAN · 2007 to 2011
$1.9M
Limited Angle Image ReconstructionR01CA158446 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO · PI SIDKY, EMIL Y · 2012 to 2015
$1.2M
Innovative reconstruction algorithms for undersampled SPECTR15CA143713 · NCI · MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY · PI SCHMIDT, TALY GILAT · 2010 to 2010
$366k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA120540NCI NIH HHS R01 CA158446NCI NIH HHS R15 CA143713NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000225
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A sparsity-exploiting algorithm intended for few-view single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) reconstruction is proposed and characterized. The algorithm models the object as piecewise constant subject to a blurring operation. To validate that the algorithm closely approximates the true object in the noiseless case, projection data were generated from an object assuming this model and using the system matrix. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to provide more realistic data of a phantom with varying smoothness across the field of view and a cardiac phantom. Reconstructions were performed across a sweep of two primary design parameters. The results demonstrate that the algorithm recovers the object in a noiseless simulation case. While the algorithm assumes a specific blurring model, the results suggest that the algorithm may provide high reconstruction accuracy even when the object does not match the assumed blurring model. Generally, increased values of the blurring parameter and total variation weighting parameters reduced streaking artifacts, while decreasing spatial resolution. The proposed algorithm demonstrated higher correlation with respect to the true phantom compared to maximum-likelihood expectation maximization (MLEM) reconstructions. Images reconstructed with the proposed algorithm demonstrated reduced streaking artifacts when reconstructing from few views compared to MLEM. The proposed algorithm introduced patchy artifacts in some reconstructed images, depending on the noise level and the selected algorithm parameters. Overall, the results demonstrate preliminary feasibility of a sparsity-exploiting reconstruction algorithm which may be beneficial for few-view SPECT.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAlgorithmsHeartImage Processing, Computer-AssistedLikelihood FunctionsMonte Carlo MethodPhantoms, ImagingTime FactorsTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon

Identifiers

PMID23892823
PMCPMC3844694

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.