Incorporation of anatomical MR data for improved functional imaging with PET

  • R Leahy
  • X Yan
2. Incorporation Of Priors In Tomographic Reconstraction
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 511)


A statistical approach to PET image reconstruction offers several potential advantages over the filtered backprojection method currently employed in most clinical PET systems: (1) the true data formation process may be modeled accurately to include the Poisson nature of the observation process and factors such as attenuation, scatter, detector efficiency and randoms; and (2) an a priori statistical model for the image may be employed to model the generally smooth nature of the desired spatial distribution and to include information such as the presence of anatomical boundaries, and hence potential discontinuities, in the image. In this paper we develop a Bayesian algorithm for PET image reconstruction in which a magnetic resonance image is used to provide information about the location of potential discontinuities in the PET image. This is achieved through the use of a Markov random field model for the image which incorporates a “line process” to model the presence of discontinuities. In the case where no a priori edge information is available, this line process may be estimated directly from the data. When edges are available from MR images, this information is introduced as a set of known a priori line sites in the image. It is demonstrated through computer simulation, that the use of a line process in the reconstruction process has the potential for significant improvements in reconstructed image quality, particularly when prior MR edge information is available.


Positron Emission Tomography Markov Random Field MAP Reconstruction 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bergstrom M, Bohm C, Ericson K, Eriksson L, and Litton J, (1980). Correlations for attenuation, scattered radiation, and random coincidences in a ring detector positron emission transaxial tomography. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 7(1):549–554.Google Scholar
  2. Besag JE, (1986). On the statistical analysis of dirty pictures. J. Royal Statist. Soc., B, 48:259–302.Google Scholar
  3. Chellappa R and Kashypa R, (1985). Texture synthesis using 2-D noncausal autoregressive models. IEEE Transactions on Acoustic, Speech and Signal processing, ASSP-33(1):194–203.Google Scholar
  4. Chen CT, Ouyang X, et al., (1990). Sensor fusion in image reconstruction. IEEE Nuc. Sci. Symp. Google Scholar
  5. Dempster AP, Laird NM, and Rubin DB, (1977). Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM algorithm. Journal of Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 39(1):1–38.Google Scholar
  6. Geman S and Geman D, (1984). Stochastic relaxation, Gibbs distributions, and the Bayesian restoration of images. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, PAMI-6(6):721–741.Google Scholar
  7. Geman S and McClure DE, (1985). Bayesian image analysis: An application to single photon emission tomography. Proceedings of the American Statistical Association, pages 12–18.Google Scholar
  8. Green PJ, (1990). Bayesian reconstructions from emission tomography data using a modified EM algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 9(1):84–93.Google Scholar
  9. Hebert T and Leahy R, (1989). A generalized EM algorithm for 3D bayesian reconstruction from poisson data using Gibbs priors. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, 8(2):194–202.Google Scholar
  10. Hebert T, Leahy R, and Singh M, (1988). Fast MLE for SPECT using an intermediate polar representation and a stopping criterion. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 34:615–619.Google Scholar
  11. Hebert T, Leahy R, and Singh M, (1990). 3D MLE reconstruction for a prototype SPECT system. J. Opt. Soc. Amer. (A), 7(7):1305–1313.Google Scholar
  12. Holmes T, Ficke D, and Snyder D, (1984). Modeling of accidental coincidences in both conventional and TOF PET. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 31:627–631.Google Scholar
  13. Huesman R, Derenzo S, et al., (1988). Orbiting transmission source for positron tomography. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 35:735–739.Google Scholar
  14. Johnson VE, Wong WH, Hu X, and Chen CT, (1990). Bayesian restoration of PET images using Gibbs priors. XIth International Conference on Information Processing in Medical Imaging.Google Scholar
  15. King PH, Hubner K, and Holloway E, (1981). Noise identification and removal in positron imaging systems. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 28(1):148–151.Google Scholar
  16. Levitan E and Herman GT, (1987). A maximum a posteriori probability expectation maximization algorithm for image reconstruction in emission tomography. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, MI-6(3):185–192.Google Scholar
  17. Liang E and Hart H, (1987). Bayesian image processing of data from constrained source distributions-non-valued, uncorrelated and correlated constraints. Bull. Math. Biol., 49:51–74.Google Scholar
  18. Mansfield P and Morris PG, (1982). NMR imaging in Biomedicine. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  19. Miller M, Snyder D, and Moore S, (1986). An evaluation of the use of sieves for producing estimates of radioactivity distribution with the EM algorithm for PET. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, 33.Google Scholar
  20. Muehllehner G and Colsher JG, (1982). Instrumentation in Computed Emission Tomography. New York.Google Scholar
  21. Rangarajan A and Chellappa R, (1990). Generalized graduated non-convexity algorithm for maximum a posteriori image estimation. Proceedings of The Tenth International Conference on Pattern Recognition.Google Scholar
  22. Shepp LA and Logan BF, (1979). The fourier transform of a head section. IEEE Transactions on Nuclear Science, NS-21:21–43.Google Scholar
  23. Shepp LA and Vardi Y, (1982). Maximum likelihood reconstruction for emission tomography. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, MI-1(2):113–122.Google Scholar
  24. Silverman BW, Jones MC, Wilson JD, and Nychka DW, (1990). A smoothed EM approach to indirect estimation problems, with particular reference to stereology and emission tomography. J. Royal Statist. Soc., B, 52(2):271–324.Google Scholar
  25. Vardi Y, Shepp LA, and Kaufman L, (1985). A statistical model for positron emission tomography. Journal of the American statistical Association, 80(389):8–37.Google Scholar
  26. Veklerov E and Lacer J, (1987). Stopping rule for the MLE algorithm based on statistical hypothesis testing. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, MI-6(4).Google Scholar
  27. Wu CFJ, (1982). On the convergence properties of the EM algorithm. Annual of Statistics, 11(1):95–103.Google Scholar
  28. Wu Z and Leahy R, (1991). A graph theoretic approach to tissue classification in MR images. In Proceedings of SPIE, SPIE-1450.Google Scholar
  29. Yan X and Leahy R, (1991). MAP image reconstruction using intensity and line processes for emission tomography data. In Proceedings of the SPIE, 1452.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • R Leahy
    • 1
  • X Yan
    • 1
  1. 1.Signal and Image Processing Institute, Department of Electrical Engineering-SystemsUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos Angeles

Personalised recommendations