The following relates generally to the medical imaging arts, positron emission tomography (PET) imaging and image reconstruction arts, regularized iterative image reconstruction arts, and related arts.
Image quality in positron emission tomography (PET) is strongly dominated by noise. Iterative maximum-a-posteriori penalized reconstruction (PR) using an edge-preserving or contrast preserving prior is one approach to suppress noise while retaining small features (e.g. tumors) that may be of clinical interest. Some edge-preserving or contrast preserving penalties include: (1) relative difference penalty (RDP) (see, e.g., J. Nuyts et al., “A concave prior penalizing relative differences for maximum-a-posteriori reconstruction in emission tomography,” IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., 2002); (2) anisotropic diffusion penalty (ADP) (see, e.g., H. Zhu, “Image reconstruction for positron emission tomography using fuzzy nonlinear anisotropic diffusion penalty,” Med Bio Eng Comput, 2006), and so on. In most edge-preserving penalties, a tuning parameter establishes sensitivity to the edge transition in the reconstructed images, and imaging data below the sensitivity threshold is smoothed by a strong low-pass filter.
Commercial PET cameras have a limited axial field of view (FOV) due to the finite axial extent of the PET detector rings or array. Therefore, a “whole body” patient scan is typically acquired in a serial “step-and-shoot” mode at multiple bed positions with certain overlap between the bed positions. For practical reasons, each bed position is typically reconstructed separately without waiting for the PET data for the next bed position to be fully acquired, and the reconstructed individual frame images are knitted into a single whole-body image. Each bed position overlaps to ensure smooth signal transition in the axial direction. Typically, for whole body studies, more than 50% of the scanned axial extent will be covered in overlap slices. Therefore, in every reconstructed image volume, there will be one or two sub-volumes that are covered by the acquired counts from either previous bed position or next bed position (note that, as discussed herein, it is assumed that in all situations considered the number of bed positions is at least larger than one).
Instead of reconstructing each bed position separately and then knitting the images together in image space, in an alternative approach the counts are pre-combined (either in sinogram format or list mode) before the reconstruction without overcomplicating the imaging workflow (see, e.g., Z. Sun, et al. “Reconstruction and combination of PET multi-bed image,” US Pub. No. 2017/0103551). However, previous work shows that at least Ordered Subset Expectation Maximization (OSEM) iterative image reconstruction algorithm demonstrates quasi-linear behavior and there is little practical benefit of pre-combining the counts before the reconstruction except for ultra-low count studies (see, e.g., S. Ross et al., “A method of overlap correction for fully 3D OSEM reconstruction of PET data”, MIC, 2004). In the case of reconstructing every bed position separately, each bed position image can have noisier appearance in the edge slices due to effective “loss” of data at the edges. But, the noise can generally be compensated during the image knitting procedure (i.e., when the individual bed position images are combined into a single whole-body image).
The following discloses new and improved systems and methods to address these problems.
In one disclosed aspect, a non-transitory computer-readable medium stores instructions readable and executable by a workstation including at least one electronic processor to perform an imaging method. The method includes: receiving imaging data on a frame by frame basis for frames along an axial direction with neighboring frames overlapping along the axial direction wherein the frames include at least a volume (k) and a succeeding volume (k+1) at least partially overlapping the volume (k) along the axial direction; and generating an image of the volume (k) using an iterative image reconstruction process in which an iteration of the iterative image reconstruction process includes: computing a local penalty function for suppressing noise over the volume (k) including reducing the value of the local penalty function in an overlap region; generating an update image of the volume (k) using imaging data from the volume (k) and further using the local penalty function.
In another disclosed aspect, an imaging system includes a positron emission tomography (PET) imaging device. At least one electronic processor is programmed to: receive imaging data on a frame by frame basis for frames along an axial direction with neighboring frames overlapping along the axial direction wherein the frames include at least a volume (k) and a succeeding volume (k+1) at least partially overlapping the volume (k) along the axial direction; and generate an image of the volume (k) using an iterative image reconstruction process in which an iteration of the iterative image reconstruction process includes: computing a local penalty function for suppressing noise over the volume (k) including reducing the value of the local penalty function in an overlap region, the local penalty function depending on the total coincidence counts passing through the voxel being penalized, and the value of the local penalty function is reduced in the overlap region by an amount compensating for the total coincidence counts passing through the voxel being penalized in the succeeding volume k+1; generating an update image of the volume (k) using imaging data from the volume (k) and further using the local penalty function. The reconstructing includes: combining the number of counts from the volumes (k) in the imaging data into a total volume; and reconstructing the total volume into a reconstructed image.
In another disclosed aspect, an imaging method performed on imaging data on a frame by frame basis for frames along an axial direction with neighboring frames overlapping along the axial direction wherein the frames include at least a volume (k) and a succeeding volume (k+1) at least partially overlapping the volume (k) along the axial direction includes: generating an image of the volume (k) using an iterative image reconstruction process in which an iteration of the iterative image reconstruction process includes: computing a local penalty function for suppressing noise over the volume (k) including reducing the value of the local penalty function in an overlap region, the local penalty function depends on local geometric sensitivity of the PET imaging device and the value of the local penalty function is reduced in the overlap region by an amount compensating for loss of geometric sensitivity due to axial truncation of the volume (k); generating an update image of the volume (k) using imaging data from the volume (k) and further using the local penalty function. The reconstructing includes reconstructing the volume (k) of the imaging data separately from the other volumes (k) of the imaging data into a reconstructed image.
In another disclosed aspect, an imaging method performed on imaging device to acquire imaging data on a frame by frame basis for frames along an axial direction with neighboring frames overlapping along the axial direction wherein the frames include at least a volume (k) and a succeeding volume (k+1) at least partially overlapping the volume (k) along the axial direction includes: generating an image of the volume (k) using an iterative image reconstruction process in which an iteration of the iterative image reconstruction process includes: adjusting the imaging data with respiratory gating using two or more gate phases and motion detected in the gate phases; computing a local penalty function for suppressing noise over the volume (k) including reducing the value of the local penalty function in an overlap region; generating an update image of the volume (k) using imaging data from the volume (k) and further using the local penalty function.
One advantage resides in utilizing all available counts from a PET imaging device to properly adjust parameters of a reconstruction penalty function.
Another advantage resides in providing an edge-preserving penalized reconstruction process that avoids over-smoothing of a final image, leading to potentially lost image features.
Another advantage resides in providing an edge-preserving penalized reconstruction process that avoids under-smoothing of a final image, leading to potential noise in the image.
Another advantage resides in, when data in overlapping regions of imaging data are combined before image reconstruction, reducing a penalty function proportionally to an effective sensitivity increase introduced by combining neighboring images in the overlap region to preserve a spatial resolution of a reconstructed image.
Another advantage resides in, when data in overlapping regions of imaging data are not combined before image reconstruction, reducing a penalty function to preserve a spatial resolution of a reconstructed image.
Another advantage resides in scaling a penalty function with an acquisition duration ratio between two imaging frames.
Another advantage resides in dynamically adjusting penalty parameters of a penalty function with count-end-points-adjusted motion corrected respiratory or cardiac gated or dynamic studies.
A given embodiment may provide none, one, two, more, or all of the foregoing advantages, and/or may provide other advantages as will become apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art upon reading and understanding the present disclosure.
The disclosure may take form in various components and arrangements of components, and in various steps and arrangements of steps. The drawings are only for purposes of illustrating the preferred embodiments and are not to be construed as limiting the disclosure.
Iterative penalized PET image reconstruction employs an update function that includes a penalty term designed to penalize (i.e. suppress) noise while retaining edges. For example, a relative difference penalty (RDP) employs a penalty P∝1/γ where the term γ is the edge preservation parameter. Larger values of γ produce a smaller penalty P which enhances preservation of features (i.e., “edges”) such as small lesions but also leads to retention of more noise; whereas, smaller values of γ increase the penalty which improves noise suppression, but can also lead to removal of clinically significant structures (i.e., “edges”) such as small lesions. In a variant approach, the penalty is locally tuned, for example by using γ=√{square root over (λisi)} where λi is the value of the voxel indexed by i and si is the geometric sensitivity at the voxel i which is proportional to the number of lines of response (LORs) passing through the voxel i. This formulation is premised on the expectation that if more LORs pass through the voxel i (hence higher si) then there should be more counts in the vicinity and hence noise should be lower at voxel i, so that a smaller penalty P can be used to enhance edges while still suppressing the (relatively low) noise. In an alternative tuning, the geometric sensitivity si is replaced by a term which quantifies the total counts in a local neighborhood around voxel i. Again, higher total counts in the local neighborhood tends to correspond with lower noise, so that a lower penalty P can be used.
It is recognized herein that such penalization frameworks can be less effective in the case of overlap regions of step-and-shoot PET imaging. In the step-and-shoot approach (also known as multi-bed imaging or similar nomenclatures), the patient is stepped through the scanner to image successive axial portions (“bed positions”) of the patient. The data acquired at each bed position is thus axially truncated at edge slices corresponding to the locations of the outermost detector rings of the PET scanner at that bed position. Conventionally, the PET counts acquired at each bed position are separately reconstructed (but possibly using information from neighboring bed positions to estimate out-of-FOV scatter), and the resulting bed position images are knitted together at the overlaps by weighted averaging of the voxel values in the overlapping regions of the bed position images. In such an approach, however, the local tuning of the penalty is computed using geometric sensitivities si for that bed position. For outer slices of the bed position, sensitivities si become small because the LORs that terminate outside of the axial FOV of the bed position do not contribute to the sensitivity si. For the extreme edge slices, only LORs that are in the plane of the slice contribute to si. This means that the penalty P∝1/γ=1/√{square root over (λisi)} becomes large at the outer slices, leading to excessive noise suppression in the overlap regions and enhance potential for suppression of clinically relevant image features such as small tumors. The subsequent knitting together of adjacent bed position images at the overlap cannot recover these suppressed features, since both overlap regions will have this same “edge effect” in the penalty leading to loss of features. The alternative formulation in which si is replaced by the total counts in a local neighborhood is similarly affected since counts are not acquired for LORs that terminate outside the truncated axial FOV of the bed position.
In some disclosed embodiments, the local penalty in the overlap regions is reduced in order to account for the above effect.
In some embodiments disclosed herein, the reduction is proportional to the effective sensitivity increase (or effective total neighborhood counts increase) that would be achieved if the truncated volume k was continued into the adjacent overlapping truncated volume k+1. In one approach employing geometric sensitivity for adjusting the penalty, this amounts to replacing γi,ksep=√{square root over (λi,ksi,k)} with γi,kjoint=√{square root over (λi,k(si,k+si,k+1))} in the overlap region, where the si,k+1 term accounts for those LORs that are not part of the volume k (and hence do not contribute to geometric sensitivity si,k) but are part of the overlapping volume k+1 (and hence contribute to the geometric sensitivity si,k+1). A similar formulation can be used if locally adjusting γ using the total counts in a local neighborhood, by employing a summation of the total counts in the neighborhood of voxel i from both overlapping volumes k and k+1.
In the above embodiment, each volume k is still reconstructed separately. In an alternative joint reconstruction embodiment, the PET counts from all volumes is first combined and then reconstructed together. In this case γi,kjoint is again used. Here a suitable formulation could be γijoint=√{square root over (λi(si,k+si,k+1))} where λi is the value of voxel i produced by the (single) joint reconstruction of the combined data set.
In a variant embodiment, if acquisition times for the various bed positions are different then the sensitivities si,k and si,k+1 are scaled proportionally to the acquisition times. This is due to a lower acquisition time resulting in fewer counts being acquired and correspondingly lower sensitivity. So, if the acquisition times are Tk and Tk+1 for respective overlapping bed positions k and k+1 then the scaling is
In other embodiments disclosed herein, an analogous approach can be applied to motion compensated PET imaging using (e.g. respiratory) gating. In this case, two successive gate phases ϕk and ϕk+1 are considered, with some motion represented by a motion vector Δr occurring between the two phases. Then a possible formulation of the adjusted edge preservation parameter is γi,jjoint=√{square root over (λi,k(si+si+Δr))}.
With reference to
The system 10 also includes a computer or workstation or other electronic data processing device 18 with typical components, such as at least one electronic processor 20, at least one user input device (e.g., a mouse, a keyboard, a trackball, trackpad, and/or the like) 22, and a display device 24 (for example, an LCD display, OLED display, plasma display, or the like). In some embodiments, the display device 24 can be a separate component from the computer 18, and/or may comprise two or more displays. The workstation 18 can also include one or more databases or non-transitory storage media 26 (such as a magnetic disk, RAID, or other magnetic storage medium; a solid state drive, flash drive, electronically erasable read-only memory (EEROM) or other electronic memory; an optical disk or other optical storage; various combinations thereof; or so forth). The display device 24 is configured to display images acquired by the imaging system 10 and typically also to display a graphical user interface (GUI) 28 including various user dialogs, e.g. each with one or more fields, radial selection buttons, et cetera to receive a user input from the user input device 22.
The at least one electronic processor 20 is operatively connected with the one or more databases 26 which stores instructions which are readable and executable by the at least one electronic processor 20 to perform disclosed operations including performing an imaging method or process 100. In some examples, the imaging method or process 100 may be performed at least in part by cloud processing.
With reference to
In one embodiment disclosed herein, the local penalty function depends on local geometric sensitivity of the PET imaging device 12 and the value of the local penalty function is reduced in the overlap region by an amount compensating for loss of geometric sensitivity due to axial truncation of the volume (k). An illustrative example is described next, in which the edge-preserving penalty function is a Relative Difference Prior (RDP) and ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM) reconstruction is used. The update image indexed n+1 for iteration n is suitably written as:
where λi is the estimated activity at the voxel indexed by i, and
is a local penalty weighting factor, ajj, is the system matrix value, si,k is the geometric sensitivity at voxel i (preferably scaled by the acquisition time if different bed positions have different acquisition times), yj is a data projection bin, and parameter γi>0 is the edge preservation parameter and steers the RDP prior. The prior is estimated over local image neighborhood Ni around the voxel i. In general, a larger value of γi produces greater edge preservation (i.e., reduces the penalty). The value γi=0 would eliminate edge preservation entirely, and the RDP becomes a quadratic prior.
As disclosed herein, the value of the local penalty function is reduced in the overlap region where bed positions of volumes k and k+1 overlap (and also where bed positions of volumes k−1 and k overlap, if current bed position k is overlapped on both ends). In some suitable embodiments, the local penalty function depends on the local geometric sensitivity si,k of the PET imaging device 12 for the voxel indexed by i in the image volume of the bed position of volume k. The geometric sensitivity at a voxel i can be viewed as the number of lines of response (LORs) passing through that voxel i. In the portion of volume k that does not overlap either of the neighboring volumes k−1 or k+1, the standard sensitivity can be used, and for the n-th iteration the value γi=γ0√{square root over (λi,kn·si,k)} can be used, where γ0 is a constant. However, in the overlap region the penalty is reduced. This is achieved by increasing the value of the edge preservation parameter γ in the overlap region by an amount compensating for loss of geometric sensitivity due to axial truncation of the volume k. Thus, a “joint” edge preservation parameter γi,kjoint is used, which can be suitably written as γi,kjoint=γ0√{square root over (λi,kn·(si,k+si,k+1))} where si,k+1 is the geometric sensitivity for the (same) voxel i in the next-neighboring volume k+1. Again, it is emphasized that this adjustment increases the edge preservation parameter (that is, λi,kjoint>λi,k) which, due to γ being in the denominator of the local RDP penalty of Equation (1), results in a reduction of the local RDP penalty in the overlap region. This reduction in the RDP penalty accounts for the additional data in volume k+1 which means that the noise is lower when the two reconstructed volumes k and k+1 are knitted together in the overlap region, so that a lower penalty can be employed in the overlap region when reconstructing the volume k to achieve a desired noise reduction, and hence the features (edges) are better preserved due to the reduced penalty in the overlap region.
In another embodiment, the local penalty function depends on the total coincidence counts passing through the voxel being penalized, and the value of the local penalty function is reduced in the overlap region by an amount compensating for the total coincidence counts passing through the voxel being penalized in the succeeding volume k+1. The penalty may be formulated in terms of actual local coincidence count statistics, rather than in terms of the geometric sensitivity. This entails replacing the geometric sensitivity s in the above expressions with actual counts. In this case, γi=γ0√{square root over (λi,kn·Ci,k)} (without overlap adjustment) where Ci,k is the count of coincidence events in the dataset for bed position k whose LORs pass through the voxel i. For time-of-flight (TOF) PET, this could be formulated as γi=γ0√{square root over (λi,kn·Σv=1C
In the above examples, the reconstruction process 106, 108 includes reconstructing each volume (k) of the imaging data separately from the other volumes (k) of the imaging data into a reconstructed bed position image, and then knitting the bed position images together in image space to generate the final image. In other embodiments, the reconstruction process 106, 108 can include combining the number of counts from all volumes (k) in the imaging data into a total volume; and reconstructing the total volume into a reconstructed image. In this latter embodiment, the local penalty function depends upon
γijoint=γ0√{square root over (λin·(si,k+si,k+1))}
In either embodiment, if the acquisition times for successive bed positions are not all the same, then the reduction of the value of the local penalty function in the overlap region is suitably also scaled based on a ratio of respective acquisition times for the volume (k) and the succeeding volume k+1.
With reference to
In some embodiments, the adjusting at operation 206 is performed according to:
γi,kjoint=γ0√{square root over (fi,k(si+si+Δr))}.
where γ is an edge preservation parameter, i is a voxel, λ is a greyscale value of the voxel, s is a geometric sensitivity passing through the voxel, and Δr is a motion vector between two gate phases ϕk and ϕk+1.
The disclosure has been described with reference to the preferred embodiments. Modifications and alterations may occur to others upon reading and understanding the preceding detailed description. It is intended that the disclosure be construed as including all such modifications and alterations insofar as they come within the scope of the appended claims or the equivalents thereof.
This application is the U.S. National Phase application under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of International Application No. PCT/EP2019/081515, filed on Nov. 15, 2019, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 62/768,131 filed Nov. 16, 2018. These applications are hereby incorporated by reference herein.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/EP2019/081515 | 11/15/2019 | WO |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2020/099649 | 5/22/2020 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
20060081784 | Ross | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20090123048 | Leroux | May 2009 | A1 |
20130182930 | Trzasko | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20140126793 | Ahn | May 2014 | A1 |
20140161340 | Zeng | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20150117733 | Manjeshwar | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150256735 | Barkan | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150363948 | Leahy | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160063741 | Ye | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160174919 | Ahn | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160225169 | Bippus | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20170053423 | Ahn | Feb 2017 | A1 |
20170061629 | Zhu | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170103551 | Sun | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170249758 | Mistretta | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20190122399 | Jain | Apr 2019 | A1 |
20200294285 | Song | Sep 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2017174627 | Oct 2017 | WO |
2018108848 | Jun 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Wang et al, Penalized Likelihood PET Image Reconstruction using Patch-based Edge-preserving Regularization, IEEE Trans Med Imaging, 31(12): 2194-2204, pp. 1-29. (Year: 2012). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion of PCT/EP2019/081515, dated Jan. 30, 2020. |
Zhu, H. “Image Reconstruction for Positron Emission Tomography using Fussy Nonlinear Anisotropic Diffusion Penalty”, Medical and Biology Engineering and Computer, Dec. 2006. |
Nuyts, J. et al “A Concave Prior Penalizing relative Differences for Maximum-a-Posteriori Reconstruction in Emission Tomography”, IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, Mar. 2002. |
Ross, S. et al “A Method of Overlap Correction for Fully 3D OSEM Reconstruction of PET Data”, MIC 2004. |
Salomon, Andre et al Information-Adaptive Regularization for Iterative PET Reconstruction, 2016. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20220012928 A1 | Jan 2022 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62768131 | Nov 2018 | US |