Utilization of an optimum low-pass filter during filtered back-projection in the reconstruction of single photon emission computed tomography images of small structures

Document Type : Original Paper

Author

Department of Medical Physics Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University SouthAfrica

Abstract

Introduction:Low-pass filters eliminate noise, and accordingly improve the quality of filtered back-projection (FBP) in the reconstruction of single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) images. This study aimed at selection of an optimum low-pass filter for FBP reconstruction of SPECT images of small structures.
Material and Methods:Spheres A, B, and C (16 mm, 12 mm, and 11 mm in diameter, respectively) attached to capillary stems were filled with technetium-99m solution (activity concentration 300 kBq/mL). They were then mounted inside a Jaszczak Phantom forming a V-shaped structure. The phantom was then filled with distilled water. Two-dimensional (2D) projections were acquired on 128 128 pixels using a Siemens E-Cam dual-head gamma camera. The Parzen, Shepp-Logan, Low Pass Cosine filters (cut-off frequencies: 0.2-0.9), and Butterworth filter (order: 1-9; cut-off frequencies: 0.3-0.9) were employed during FBP reconstruction. The line command of ImageJ software was used to draw the point spread functions of acquired 2D transaxial central slices and for the measurement of their full-width at half-maximum (FWHM).
Results:The FWHM of 2D central image slices of spheres A, B, and C reconstructed using a Butterworth filter measured 20, 20, and 10 pixels, respectively. In comparison, the reconstructed images using the Parzen, Low Pass Cosine, and Shepp-Logan filters measured to 27, 25 and, 22 pixels for sphere A, 24, 22, 20 pixels for B, and 22, 20, 18 pixels for C, respectively.
Conclusion: The low-pass filters successfully suppressed noise during the FBP reconstruction of SPECT images of small structures. Accordingly, the Butterworth is a suitable choice.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. References

     

    1. Zaidi H. Quantitative Analysis in Nuclear Medicine Imaging. Boston, MA: Springer Science & Business Media, Inc. 2006.
    2. Mpumelelo N. Determination of Optimum Planar Imaging Parameters for Small Structures with Diameters Less Than the Resolution of the Gamma Camera. Iran J Med Phys. 2017; 14219-28. DOI: 10.22038/ijmp.2017.24559.1246.
    3. Lyra M, Ploussi A, Rouchota M, Synefia S. Filters in 2D and 3D Cardiac SPECT Image Processing. Cardiol Res Pract. 2014; 2014:963264.                                                      DOI: 10.1155/2014/963264.
    4. Lyra M, Ploussi A. Filtering in SPECT Image Reconstruction. International Journal of Biomedical Imaging.  1; 2011:10.                                                                                        DOI: 10.1155/2011/693795.
    5. Sayed IS, Nasrudin NSM. Effect of Cut-Off Frequency of Butterworth Filter on Detectability and Contrast of Hot and Cold Regions in Tc-99m SPECT. International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology. 2016; 5: 100-9.
    6. Zeng GL. Revisit of the Ramp Filter. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 2015; 62(1): 131–6. DOI:10.1109/TNS.2014.2363776.
    7. Mettler Jr FA, Guiberteau MJ. Essentials of Nuclear Medicine Imaging. 4th ed. Philadelphia; Saunder an Imprint of Elservier; 2003.
    8. Sadremomtaz A, Taherparvar P. Filtering in SPECT Image Reconstruction The influence of filters on the SPECT image of Carlson phantom. J. Biomedical Science and Engineering. 2013; 6: 291-7.
    9. Yusoff M, Salihin N, Zakaria A. Determination of the optimum filter for qualitative and quantitative 99mTc myocardial SPECT imaging. Iran J Radiat Res. 2009; 6:173-82.
    10. Benjamin G, Tsui MW, McCartney W, Perry J, Berg J. Determination of the Optimum Filter Function for SPECT Imaging. J Nucl Med. 1988; 29:643-50.
    11. Hawkings J. The basics of tomographic Reconstruction and filtering. 2017 [cited 2017 Oct 10]: Available from: http://passthrough.fw-notify.net.
    12. Groch MW, Erwin WD. SPECT in the year 2000: Basic Principles. J Nucl Med. 2000; 28: 233-44.
    13. Links J.M, Advances in nuclear medicine instrumentation: considerations in the design and selection of an imaging system. Eur J Nucl Med. 1998; 25:10.
    14. Livieratos L. Basic Principles of SPECT and PET imaging. Chapter 12. Radionuclide and Hybrid Bone Imaging. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 2013.
    15. Maria LG, Agapi P, Maritina R, Stella S. Filters in 2D and 3D Cardiac SPECT Image Processing. 2018 [cited 2018 Nov 8]. Available from:  http://avidscience.com.
    16. Dong X, Saripan MI, MahumudR, Mashohor S, Wang A. Determination of the optimum filter for 99mTc SPECT breast imaging using a wire mesh collimator. Pak J Nucl Med. 2017; 7(1):9-15.

    Zaidi H. Comparative methods for quantifying thyroid volume using planar imaging and SPECT. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 1996; 37 (8):1421

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 16, Issue 4 - Serial Number 4
July and August 2019
Pages 300-306

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 31 December 2017
  • Revise Date: 09 November 2018
  • Accept Date: 11 November 2018

Share

How to cite

Statistics