Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Meeting ReportOral Presentations - Physicians/Scientists/Pharmacists

Reducing inter-scanner PET image variability

Aniket Joshi, Jeffrey Fessler and Robert Koeppe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2006, 47 (suppl 1) 58P;
Aniket Joshi
2Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeffrey Fessler
3Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert Koeppe
1Division of Nuclear Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
Loading

Abstract

168

Objectives: Our goal is to reduce systematic inter-scanner PET image variability. In spite of standardized protocols for scanner calibration, normalization, attenuation/scatter/randoms corrections, and image reconstruction, there exist differences in the scans acquired on different PET scanner models. These differences may manifest in the form of bias in gray-to-white, midline-to-lateral, anterior-to-posterior or superior-to-inferior ratios in addition to differences in image resolution. It is important to minimize these differences before pooling data in multi-center trials.

Methods: This work is part of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) in which FDG-PET scans of a Hoffman brain phantom were acquired at over 50 sites. All image sets were registered to a digital Hoffman phantom, producing images with a standard orientation and uniform voxel size. Scans obtained from sites having the same scanner model were reconstructed identically, normalized and averaged to obtain a single image volume per scanner model (9 models to date). We treat this as an image restoration problem and model a PET scan as a distorted form of the digital phantom (gold standard): Y ≈ a1(k)X(k) + a2(k). (Eq. 1) X(k) is the scanned phantom image from the k'th scanner model and Y is the digital phantom smoothed to match the resolution of the highest resolution scanner. a1(k) and a2(k) are restoration terms and are chosen as second order polynomials in three dimensions. Their coefficients are estimated by linear least squares fitting of Eq. 1. The corrected image is expressed as: X(corrected)(k) = â1(k)X(k) + â2(k). (Eq. 2)

Results: Corrected images were produced for each scanner model. A set of 54 VOIs was applied to each image volume pre- and post-correction. The correction method removed nearly all the bias present in the gray and white matter regions and reduced the variability in various ratios (G:W, M:L, A:P) across the scanner models (see Table).

Conclusions: The method successfully reduced inter-scanner variability and is a good first-order correction for PET images acquired within a multi-center study.

Research Support (if any): NIH Grant: U01 AG024904


Embedded Image

  • Society of Nuclear Medicine, Inc.
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 47, Issue suppl 1
May 1, 2006
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Reducing inter-scanner PET image variability
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Reducing inter-scanner PET image variability
Aniket Joshi, Jeffrey Fessler, Robert Koeppe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2006, 47 (suppl 1) 58P;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Reducing inter-scanner PET image variability
Aniket Joshi, Jeffrey Fessler, Robert Koeppe
Journal of Nuclear Medicine May 2006, 47 (suppl 1) 58P;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

Oral Presentations - Physicians/Scientists/Pharmacists

  • Utility of 99mTc-mebrofenin for assessing cytokine-dependent liver inflammation
  • A strategy for N(+) advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Arranging by FDG-PET
  • Preliminary results of the Italian FOLCETUX study: Early evaluation of treatment response with 18FDG PET in gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma
Show more Oral Presentations - Physicians/Scientists/Pharmacists

Instrumentation & Data Analysis Track

  • Deep Learning Based Kidney Segmentation for Glomerular Filtration Rate Measurement Using Quantitative SPECT/CT
  • The Benefit of Time-of-Flight in Digital Photon Counting PET Imaging: Physics and Clinical Evaluation
  • Preclinical validation of a single-scan rest/stress imaging technique for 13NH3 cardiac perfusion studies
Show more Instrumentation & Data Analysis Track

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire