Advanced

Comparison of four scatter correction methods using Monte Carlo simulated source distributions

Ljungberg, Michael LU ; King, Michael A; Hademenos, George J and Strand, Sven-Erik LU (1994) In Journal of Nuclear Medicine 35(1). p.143-151
Abstract
Scatter correction in SPECT is important for improving image quality, boundary detection and the quantification of activity in different regions. This paper presents a comparison of four scatter correction methods, three using more than one energy window and one convolution-subtraction correction method using spatial variant scatter line-spread functions. METHODS: The comparison is based on Monte Carlo simulated data for point sources on- and off-axis, hot and cold spheres of different diameters, and a clinically realistic source distribution simulating brain imaging. All studies were made for a uniform cylindrical water phantom. Since the nature of the detected photon is known with Monte Carlo simulation, separate images of primary and... (More)
Scatter correction in SPECT is important for improving image quality, boundary detection and the quantification of activity in different regions. This paper presents a comparison of four scatter correction methods, three using more than one energy window and one convolution-subtraction correction method using spatial variant scatter line-spread functions. METHODS: The comparison is based on Monte Carlo simulated data for point sources on- and off-axis, hot and cold spheres of different diameters, and a clinically realistic source distribution simulating brain imaging. All studies were made for a uniform cylindrical water phantom. Since the nature of the detected photon is known with Monte Carlo simulation, separate images of primary and scattered photons can be recorded. These can then be compared with estimated scatter and primary images obtained from the different scatter correction methods. The criteria for comparison were the normalized mean square error, scatter fraction, % recovery and image contrast. RESULTS: All correction methods significantly improved image quality and quantification compared to those obtained with no correction. Quantitatively, no single method was observed to be the best by all criteria for all the source distributions. Three of the methods were observed to perform the best by at least one of the criteria for one of the source distributions. For brain imaging, the differences between all the methods were much less than the difference between them and no correction at all. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that performing scatter correction is essential for accurate quantification, and that all four methods yield a good, but not perfect, scatter correction. Since it is hard to distinguish the methods consistently in terms of their performance, it may be that the choice should be made on the basis of ease of implementation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Monte Carlo simulated data, brain imaging, SPECT, scatter correction
in
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
volume
35
issue
1
pages
143 - 151
publisher
Society of Nuclear Medicine
external identifiers
  • scopus:0028058070
ISSN
0161-5505
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
c46d1277-b190-43c1-a519-09c10fc2fe5b (old id 1108176)
alternative location
http://jnm.snmjournals.org/cgi/reprint/35/1/143
date added to LUP
2008-07-23 15:06:48
date last changed
2017-08-13 04:21:58
@article{c46d1277-b190-43c1-a519-09c10fc2fe5b,
  abstract     = {Scatter correction in SPECT is important for improving image quality, boundary detection and the quantification of activity in different regions. This paper presents a comparison of four scatter correction methods, three using more than one energy window and one convolution-subtraction correction method using spatial variant scatter line-spread functions. METHODS: The comparison is based on Monte Carlo simulated data for point sources on- and off-axis, hot and cold spheres of different diameters, and a clinically realistic source distribution simulating brain imaging. All studies were made for a uniform cylindrical water phantom. Since the nature of the detected photon is known with Monte Carlo simulation, separate images of primary and scattered photons can be recorded. These can then be compared with estimated scatter and primary images obtained from the different scatter correction methods. The criteria for comparison were the normalized mean square error, scatter fraction, % recovery and image contrast. RESULTS: All correction methods significantly improved image quality and quantification compared to those obtained with no correction. Quantitatively, no single method was observed to be the best by all criteria for all the source distributions. Three of the methods were observed to perform the best by at least one of the criteria for one of the source distributions. For brain imaging, the differences between all the methods were much less than the difference between them and no correction at all. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that performing scatter correction is essential for accurate quantification, and that all four methods yield a good, but not perfect, scatter correction. Since it is hard to distinguish the methods consistently in terms of their performance, it may be that the choice should be made on the basis of ease of implementation.},
  author       = {Ljungberg, Michael and King, Michael A and Hademenos, George J and Strand, Sven-Erik},
  issn         = {0161-5505},
  keyword      = {Monte Carlo simulated data,brain imaging,SPECT,scatter correction},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {143--151},
  publisher    = {Society of Nuclear Medicine},
  series       = {Journal of Nuclear Medicine},
  title        = {Comparison of four scatter correction methods using Monte Carlo simulated source distributions},
  volume       = {35},
  year         = {1994},
}