
doi: 10.1007/bf02988506
pmid: 11831400
The quality of images reconstructed by means of the maximum likelihood-expectation maximization (ML-EM) and ordered subset (OS)-EM algorithms, was examined with parameters such as the number of iterations and subsets, then compared with the quality of images reconstructed by the filtered back projection method.Phantoms showing signals inside signals, which mimicked single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) images of cerebral blood flow and myocardial perfusion, and phantoms showing signals around the signals obtained by SPECT of bone and tumor were used for experiments. To determine signals for recognition, SPECT images in which the signals could be appropriately recognized with a combination of fewer iterations and subsets of different sizes and densities were evaluated by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. The results of ROC analysis were applied to myocardial phantom experiments and scintigraphy of myocardial perfusion.Taking the image processing time into consideration, good SPECT images were obtained by OS-EM at iteration No. 10 and subset 5. CONCLULSION: This study will be helpful for selection of parameters such as the number of iterations and subsets when using the ML-EM or OS-EM algorithms.
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon, Likelihood Functions, ROC Curve, Phantoms, Imaging, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Models, Cardiovascular, Humans, Algorithms
Tomography, Emission-Computed, Single-Photon, Likelihood Functions, ROC Curve, Phantoms, Imaging, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Models, Cardiovascular, Humans, Algorithms
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
