z-logo
Premium
Automatic 3D registration of dynamic stress and rest 82 Rb and flurpiridaz F 18 myocardial perfusion PET data for patient motion detection and correction
Author(s) -
Woo Jonghye,
Tamarappoo Balaji,
Dey Damini,
Nakazato Ryo,
Le Meunier Ludovic,
Ramesh Amit,
Lazewatsky Joel,
Germano Guido,
Berman Daniel S.,
Slomka Piotr J.
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.3656951
Subject(s) - nuclear medicine , myocardial perfusion imaging , cardiac pet , correction for attenuation , perfusion , positron emission tomography , artificial intelligence , image registration , scanner , perfusion scanning , medicine , computer vision , computer science , radiology , image (mathematics)
Purpose: The authors aimed to develop an image‐based registration scheme to detect and correct patient motion in stress and rest cardiac positron emission tomography (PET)/CT images. The patient motion correction was of primary interest and the effects of patient motion with the use of flurpiridaz F 18 and 82 Rb were demonstrated.Methods: The authors evaluated stress/rest PET myocardial perfusion imaging datasets in 30 patients (60 datasets in total, 21 male and 9 female) using a new perfusion agent (flurpiridaz F 18) ( n  = 16) and 82 Rb ( n  = 14), acquired on a Siemens Biograph‐64 scanner in list mode. Stress and rest images were reconstructed into 4 ( 82 Rb) or 10 (flurpiridaz F 18) dynamic frames (60 s each) using standard reconstruction (2D attenuation weighted ordered subsets expectation maximization). Patient motion correction was achieved by an image‐based registration scheme optimizing a cost function using modified normalized cross‐correlation that combined global and local features. For comparison, visual scoring of motion was performed on the scale of 0 to 2 (no motion, moderate motion, and large motion) by two experienced observers.Results: The proposed registration technique had a 93% success rate in removing left ventricular motion, as visually assessed. The maximum detected motion extent for stress and rest were 5.2 mm and 4.9 mm for flurpiridaz F 18 perfusion and 3.0 mm and 4.3 mm for 82 Rb perfusion studies, respectively. Motion extent (maximum frame‐to‐frame displacement) obtained for stress and rest were (2.2 ± 1.1, 1.4 ± 0.7, 1.9 ± 1.3) mm and (2.0 ± 1.1, 1.2 ±0 .9, 1.9 ± 0.9) mm for flurpiridaz F 18 perfusion studies and (1.9 ± 0.7, 0.7 ± 0.6, 1.3 ± 0.6) mm and (2.0 ± 0.9, 0.6 ± 0.4, 1.2 ± 1.2) mm for 82 Rb perfusion studies, respectively. A visually detectable patient motion threshold was established to be ≥2.2 mm, corresponding to visual user scores of 1 and 2. After motion correction, the average increases in contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR) from all frames for larger than the motion threshold were 16.2% in stress flurpiridaz F 18 and 12.2% in rest flurpiridaz F 18 studies. The average increases in CNR were 4.6% in stress 82 Rb studies and 4.3% in rest 82 Rb studies.Conclusions: Fully automatic motion correction of dynamic PET frames can be performed accurately, potentially allowing improved image quantification of cardiac PET data.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here