Combination of compressed sensing-based iterative reconstruction and offset acquisition for I-123 FP-CIT SPECT: a simulation study

Document Type : Original Article


Department of Medical Radiological Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan


Objective(s): The purpose of this study was to validate undersampled single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) imaging using a combination of compressed sensing (CS) iterative reconstruction (CS-IR) and offset acquisition.
Methods: Three types of numerical phantoms were used to evaluate image quality and quantification derived from CS with offset acquisition. SPECT images were reconstructed using filtered back-projection (FBP), maximum likelihood-expectation maximization (ML-EM), CS-IR, and CS-IR with offset acquisition. The efficacy of CS-IR with offset acquisition was examined in terms of spatial resolution, aspect ratio (ASR), activity concentration linearity, contrast, percent coefficient of variation (%CV), and specific binding ratio (SBR).
Results: The full widths at half maximum remained unchanged as the number of projections decreased in CS-IR with offset acquisition. Changes in ASRs and linearities of count density were observed for ML-EM and CS-IR from undersampled projections. The %CV obtained by CS-IR with offset acquisition was substantially lower than that obtained by ML-EM and CS-IR. There were no significant differences between the %CVs obtained from 60 projections by CS-IR with offset acquisition and from 120 projections by FBP. Although the SBRs for CS-IR with offset acquisition tended to be slightly lower than for FBP, the SBRs for CS-IR with offset acquisition did not change with the number of projections.
Conclusions: CS-IR with offset acquisition can provide good image quality and quantification compared with a commonly used SPECT reconstruction method, especially from undersampled projection data. Our proposed method could shorten overall SPECT acquisition times, which would benefit patients and enable quantification with dynamic SPECT acquisitions.


  1. Larsson SA. Gamma Camera Emission Tomography. Acta Radiologica Stockholm, 1980; 21-2.
  2. Darcourt J, Booij J, Tatsch K, Varrone A, Vander Borght T, Kapucu ÖL, et al. EANM procedure guidelines for brain neurotransmission SPECT using (123)I-labelled dopamine transporter ligands, version 2. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010; 37(2): 443-50.
  3. Djang DS, Janssen MJ, Bohnen N, Booij J, Henderson TA, Herholz K, et al. SNM practice guideline for dopamine transporter imaging with 123I-ioflupane SPECT 1.0. J Nucl Med. 2012; 53(1): 154-63.
  4. Strauss HW, Miller DD, Wittry MD, Cerqueira MD, Garcia EV, Iskandrian AS, et al. Procedure guideline for myocardial perfusion imaging 3.3. J Nucl Med Technol. 2008; 36(3): 155–61.
  5. Verberne HJ, Acampa W, Anagnostopoulos C,Ballinger J, Bengel F, De Bondt P, et al. EANM procedural guidelines for radionuclide myocardial perfusion imaging with SPECT and SPECT/CT: 2015 revision.Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2015; 42(12):1929-40.
  6. Candès EJ, Romberg J, Tao T. Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Trans on Information Theory 2006; 52(2):489-509.
  7. Donoho DL: Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans on Information Theory 2006; 52(4):1289-306.
  8. Matsutomo N, Fukaya K, Hashimoto T, Yamamoto T, Sato E. Performance of compressed sensing-based iterative reconstruction for single-photon emission computed tomography from undersampled projection data: a simulation study in 123I-N-ω-fluoropropyl-2β-carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl) nortropane imaging. Nucl Med Commun. 2019; 40(2): 106-14.
  9. Takahashi Y, Oriuchi N, Higashino H, Improvement of image resolution of brain SPECT by use of the wide-angle offset acquisition method. Ann Nucl Med. 2011; 25(1): 69-74.
  10. Furuta A, Onishi H, Yamaki N, Yada N, Amijima H. Impact of quantitative index derived from 123I-FP-CIT-SPECT on recon-struction with correction methods evaluated using a 3D-striatum digital brain phantom. Radiol Phys Technol. 2018; 11(3): 294-302.
  11. Ljungberg M, Strand SE. A Monte Carlo program for the simulation of scintillation camera characteristics. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 1989; 29: 257-72.
  12. Bahreyni Toossi MT, Islamian JP, Momennezhad M, Ljungberg M, Naseri SH. SIMIND Monte Carlo simulation of a single photon emission CT. J Med Phys. 2010; 35(1): 42-7.
  13. Panin VY, Zeng GL, Gullberg GT. Total variation regulated EM algorithm [SPECT reconstruction]. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 1999; 46(6): 2202-10.
  14. Takahashi Y, Murase K, Higashino H, Mochizuki T, Motomura N. SPECT imaging with off-set detector system: comparison among sampling angles 2, 4, and 6 degrees. Ann Nucl Med. 2002; 16: 363–7.
  15. B Hutton. Angular sampling necessary for clinical SPECT. J Nucl Med. 1996; 37(11): 1915-16.
  16. Takahashi Y, Murase K, Mochizuki T, Higashino H, Sugawara Y, Kinda A. Evaluation of the number of SPECT projections in the ordered subsets-expectation maximization image reconstruction method. Ann Nucl Med. 2003; 17(7): 525-30.