Hutton, BF; Thomas, BA; Erlandsson, K; Bousse, A; Reilhac-Laborde, A; Kazantsev, D; Pedemonte, S; ... Ourselin, S; + view all Hutton, BF; Thomas, BA; Erlandsson, K; Bousse, A; Reilhac-Laborde, A; Kazantsev, D; Pedemonte, S; Vunckx, K; Arridge, SR; Ourselin, S; - view fewer (2013) What approach to brain partial volume correction is best for PET/MRI? Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment , 702 29 - 33. 10.1016/j.nima.2012.07.059.

Preview

PDF 1390050.pdf Download (492kB)

Abstract

Many partial volume correction approaches make use of anatomical information, readily available in PET/MRI systems but it is not clear what approach is best. Seven novel approaches to partial volume correction were evaluated, including several post-reconstruction methods and several reconstruction methods that incorporate anatomical information. These were compared with an MRI-independent approach (reblurred van Cittert ) and uncorrected data. Monte Carlo PET data were generated for activity distributions representing both 18F FDG and amyloid tracer uptake. Post-reconstruction methods provided the best recovery with ideal segmentation but were particularly sensitive to mis-registration. Alternative approaches performed better in maintaining lesion contrast (unseen in MRI) with good noise control. These were also relatively insensitive to mis-registration errors. The choice of method will depend on the specific application and reliability of segmentation and registration algorithms.

Download activity - last month

Export as XMLCSVJSON

Download activity - last 12 months

Export as CSVJSONXML

Downloads by country - last 12 months

Export as XMLJSONCSV

Archive Staff Only

View Item