Impact of the Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm (Q.Clear®) in comparison with the OSEM reconstruction on low contrast PET hypoxic images

被引:16
|
作者
Texte, Edgar [1 ]
Gouel, Pierrick [1 ,2 ]
Thureau, Sebastien [2 ,3 ]
Lequesne, Justine [4 ]
Barres, Bertrand [5 ]
Edet-Sanson, Agathe [1 ,2 ]
Decazes, Pierre [1 ,2 ]
Vera, Pierre [1 ,2 ]
Hapdey, Sebastien [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Henri Becquerel Canc Ctr, Nucl Med Dept, Rouen, France
[2] Rouen Univ Hosp, QuantIF LITIS EA4108, Rouen, France
[3] Henri Becquerel Canc Ctr, Radiotherapy Dept, Rouen, France
[4] Henri Becquerel Canc Ctr, Clin Res Dept, Rouen, France
[5] Jean Perrin Canc Ctr, Nucl Med Dept, Clermont Ferrand, France
关键词
PET/CT; Hypoxia; NSCLC; BPL reconstruction; CLINICAL-EVALUATION;
D O I
10.1186/s40658-020-00300-3
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose To determine the impact of the Bayesian penalized likelihood (BPL) reconstruction algorithm in comparison to OSEM on hypoxia PET/CT images of NSCLC using F-18-MIZO and F-18-FAZA. Materials and methods Images of low-contrasted (SBR = 3) micro-spheres of Jaszczak phantom were acquired. Twenty patients with lung neoplasia were included. Each patient benefitted from F-18-MISO and/or F-18-FAZA PET/CT exams, reconstructed with OSEM and BPL. Lesion was considered as hypoxic if the lesion SUVmax > 1.4. A blind evaluation of lesion detectability and image quality was performed on a set of 78 randomized BPL and OSEM images by 10 nuclear physicians. SUVmax, SUVmean, and hypoxic volumes using 3 thresholding approaches were measured and compared for each reconstruction. Results The phantom and patient datasets showed a significant increase of quantitative parameters using BPL compared to OSEM but had no impact on detectability. The optimal beta parameter determined by the phantom analysis was beta 350. Regarding patient data, there was no clear trend of image quality improvement using BPL. There was no correlation between SUVmax increase with BPL and either SUV or hypoxic volume from the initial OSEM reconstruction. Hypoxic volume obtained by a SUV > 1.4 thresholding was not impacted by the BPL reconstruction parameter. Conclusion BPL allows a significant increase in quantitative parameters and contrast without significantly improving the lesion detectability or image quality. The variation in hypoxic volume by BPL depends on the method used but SUV > 1.4 thresholding seems to be the more robust method, not impacted by the reconstruction method (BPL or OSEM).
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Impact of the Bayesian penalized likelihood algorithm (Q.Clear®) in comparison with the OSEM reconstruction on low contrast PET hypoxic images
    Edgar Texte
    Pierrick Gouel
    Sébastien Thureau
    Justine Lequesne
    Bertrand Barres
    Agathe Edet-Sanson
    Pierre Decazes
    Pierre Vera
    Sébastien Hapdey
    EJNMMI Physics, 7
  • [2] Impact of γ factor in the penalty function of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction (Q.Clear) to achieve high-resolution PET images
    Miwa, Kenta
    Yoshii, Tokiya
    Wagatsuma, Kei
    Nezu, Shogo
    Kamitaka, Yuto
    Yamao, Tensho
    Kobayashi, Rinya
    Fukuda, Shohei
    Yakushiji, Yu
    Miyaji, Noriaki
    Ishii, Kenji
    EJNMMI PHYSICS, 2023, 10 (01)
  • [3] Impact of γ factor in the penalty function of Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction (Q.Clear) to achieve high-resolution PET images
    Kenta Miwa
    Tokiya Yoshii
    Kei Wagatsuma
    Shogo Nezu
    Yuto Kamitaka
    Tensho Yamao
    Rinya Kobayashi
    Shohei Fukuda
    Yu Yakushiji
    Noriaki Miyaji
    Kenji Ishii
    EJNMMI Physics, 10
  • [4] Comparison of Q.Clear and OSEM reconstruction algorithm on PET/CT images in patients with metastatic breast cancer
    Naghavi-Behzad, M.
    Vogsen, M.
    Gerke, O.
    Dahlsgaard-Wallenius, S. E.
    Nissen, H. J.
    Jakobsen, N. M.
    Braad, P.
    Vilstrup, M. H.
    Deak, P.
    Hildebrandt, M. G.
    Andersen, T. L.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2022, 49 (SUPPL 1) : S306 - S307
  • [5] Optimization of β values of new penalized likelihood reconstruction algorithm Q.Clear in brain PET
    Kamitaka, Y.
    Miwa, K.
    Wagatsuma, K.
    Hiratsuka, S.
    Yamao, T.
    Nemoto, R.
    Suga, M.
    Nishii, R.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2018, 45 : S750 - S751
  • [6] Does Bayesian penalized likelihood reconstruction (Q.Clear) for FDG-PET always outperform image quality of OSEM-based reconstruction?
    Rogasch, J. M. M.
    Hofheinz, F.
    Suleiman, S.
    Lukas, M.
    Amthauer, H.
    Furth, C.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2019, 46 (SUPPL 1) : S781 - S781
  • [7] Phantom and Clinical Evaluation of the Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Reconstruction Algorithm Q.Clear on an LYSO PET/CT System
    Teoh, Eugene J.
    McGowan, Daniel R.
    Macpherson, Ruth E.
    Bradley, Kevin M.
    Gleeson, Fergus V.
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2015, 56 (09) : 1447 - 1452
  • [8] Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Image Reconstruction (Q.Clear) in 82Rb Cardiac PET: Impact of Count Statistics
    Christensen, N.
    Tolbod, L. P.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE AND MOLECULAR IMAGING, 2017, 44 : S342 - S342
  • [9] Bayesian Penalized Likelihood Image Reconstruction (Q.Clear) in oncology: Effects of contrast and count-rate dependence.
    Tolbod, Lars
    Christensen, Nana L.
    Munk, Ole
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2019, 60
  • [10] Impact of the Q.Clear reconstruction algorithm on the interpretation of PET/CT images in patients with lymphoma
    Wyrzykowski, Michal
    Siminiak, Natalia
    Kazmierczak, Maciej
    Ruchala, Marek
    Czepczynski, Rafal
    EJNMMI RESEARCH, 2020, 10 (01)