A systematic performance evaluation of head motion correction techniques for 3 commercial PET scanners using a reproducible experimental acquisition protocol

• Published in: Annals of nuclear medicine Vol. 33; no. 7; pp. 459 - 470
• Main Authors: Inomata, Takato, Watanuki, Shoichi, Odagiri, Hayato, Nambu, Takeyuki, Karakatsanis, Nicolas A., Ito, Hiroshi, Watabe, Hiroshi, Tashiro, Manabu, Shidahara, Miho
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Singapore Springer Singapore 01.07.2019; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Algorithms; Brain; Brain - diagnostic imaging; Computed tomography; Head; Head - physiology; Head movement; Image acquisition; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods; Image reconstruction; Imaging; Medical imaging; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Movement; Neuroimaging; Nuclear Medicine; Optical scanners; Optical tracking; Original Article; Performance evaluation; Phantoms, Imaging; Pitch (inclination); Point sources; Positron emission; Positron emission tomography; Positron-Emission Tomography - instrumentation; Radiology; Reproducibility; Rigid-body dynamics; Scanners; Sodium 22; Spatial discrimination; Spatial resolution; Tomography; Tracking systems; Yaw; Motion-correction; Optical tracking; PET/MR; Brain PET; Reproducibility
• ISSN: 0914-7187; 1864-6433
• DOI: 10.1007/s12149-019-01353-w

Purposes Subject’s motion during brain PET scan degrades spatial resolution and quantification of PET images. To suppress these effects, rigid-body motion correction systems have been installed in commercial PET scanners. In this study, we systematically compare the accuracy of motion correction among 3 commercial PET scanners using a reproducible experimental acquisition protocol. Methods A cylindrical phantom with two 22 Na point sources was placed on a customized base to enable two types of motion, 5° yaw and 15° pitch rotations. Repetitive PET scans (5 min × 5 times) were performed at rest and under 2 motion conditions using 3 clinical PET scanners: the Eminence STARGATE G/L PET/CT (STARGATE) (Shimadzu Corp.), the SET-3000 B/X PET (SET-3000) (Shimadzu Corp.), and the Biograph mMR PET/MR (mMR) (Siemens Healthcare) systems. For STARGATE and SET-3000, the Polaris Vicra (Northern Digital Inc.) optical tracking system was used for frame-by-frame motion correction. For Biograph mMR, sequential MR images were simultaneously acquired with PET and used for LOR-based motion correction. All PET images were reconstructed by FBP algorithm with 1 × 1 mm pixel size. To evaluate the accuracy of motion correction, FWHMs and spherical ROI values were analyzed. Results The percent differences (%diff) in averaged FWHMs of point sources at 4 cm off-center between motion-corrected and static images were 0.77 ± 0.16 (STARGATE), 2.4 ± 0.34 (SET-3000), and 11 ± 1.0% (mMR) for a 5° yaw and 2.3 ± 0.37 (STARGATE) and 1.1 ± 0.60 (SET-3000) for a 15° pitch respectively. The averaged %diff between ROI values of motion-corrected images and static images were less than 2.0% for all conditions. Conclusions In this study, we proposed a reproducible experimental framework to allow the systematic validation and comparison of multiple motion tracking and correction methodologies among different PET/CT and PET/MR commercial systems. Our proposed validation platform may be useful for future studies evaluating state-of-the-art motion correction strategies in clinical PET imaging.