Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32562010›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI physics2020

Use of non-Gaussian time-of-flight kernels for image reconstruction of Monte Carlo simulated data of ultra-fast PET scanners.

Nikos Efthimiou, Kris Thielemans, Elise Emond, Chris Cawthorne, Stephen J Archibald, Charalampos Tsoumpas

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI physics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Image Reconstruction Analysis for Positron Emission Tomography With Heterostructured Scintillators.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. TOF-PET Image Reconstruction With Multiple Timing Kernels Applied on Cherenkov Radiation in BGO.IEEE transactions on radiation and plasma medical sciences · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Nikos EfthimiouPET Research Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Hull, Cottingham Rd, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK. efthymin@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1947-5033
Kris ThielemansInstitute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Elise EmondInstitute of Nuclear Medicine, University College London, London, UK.
Chris CawthorneNuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging, Department of Imaging and Pathology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Stephen J ArchibaldPET Research Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Hull, Cottingham Rd, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK.
Charalampos TsoumpasBiomedical Imaging Science Department, School of Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTime-of-flight (TOF) positron emission tomography (PET) scanners can provide significant benefits by improving the noise properties of reconstructed images. In order to achieve this, the timing response of the scanner needs to be modelled as part of the reconstruction process. This is currently achieved using Gaussian TOF kernels. However, the timing measurements do not necessarily follow a Gaussian distribution. In ultra-fast timing resolutions, the depth of interaction of the γ-photon and the photon travel spread (PTS) in the crystal volume become increasingly significant factors for the timing performance. The PTS of a single photon can be approximated better by a truncated exponential distribution. Therefore, we computed the corresponding TOF kernel as a modified Laplace distribution for long crystals. The obtained (CTR) kernels could be more appropriate to model the joint probability of the two in-coincidenceγ-photons. In this paper, we investigate the impact of using a CTR kernel vs. Gaussian kernels in TOF reconstruction using Monte Carlo generated data. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe geometry and physics of a PET scanner with two timing configurations, (a) idealised timing resolution, in which only the PTS contributed in the CTR, and (b) with a range of ultra-fast timings, were simulated. In order to assess the role of the crystal thickness, different crystal lengths were considered. The evaluation took place in terms of Kullback-Leibler (K-L) distance between the proposed model and the simulated timing response, contrast recovery (CRC) and spatial resolution. The reconstructions were performed using STIR image reconstruction toolbox.

resultsResults for the idealised scanner showed that the CTR kernel was in excellent agreement with the simulated time differences. In terms of K-L distance outperformed the a fitted normal distribution for all tested crystal sizes. In the case of the ultra-fast configurations, a convolution kernel between the CTR and a Gaussian showed the best agreement with the simulated data below 40 ps timing resolution. In terms of CRC, the CTR kernel demonstrated improvements, with values that ranged up to 3.8% better CRC for the thickest crystal. In terms of spatial resolution, evaluated at the 60th iteration, the use of CTR kernel showed a modest improvement of the peek-to-valley ratios up to 1% for the 10-mm crystal, while for larger crystals, a clear trend was not observed. In addition, we showed that edge artefacts can appear in the reconstructed images when the timing kernel used for the reconstruction is not carefully optimised. Further iterations, can help improve the edge artefacts.

Indexed as

Depth of interactionFast timingMonte CarloPhoton travel spreadPositron emission tomography

Identifiers

PMID32562010
PMCPMC7305275

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.