» Articles » PMID: 26225440

3D Pulse EPR Imaging from Sparse-view Projections Via Constrained, Total Variation Minimization

Overview
Journal J Magn Reson
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2015 Jul 31
PMID 26225440
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Tumors and tumor portions with low oxygen concentrations (pO2) have been shown to be resistant to radiation therapy. As such, radiation therapy efficacy may be enhanced if delivered radiation dose is tailored based on the spatial distribution of pO2 within the tumor. A technique for accurate imaging of tumor oxygenation is critically important to guide radiation treatment that accounts for the effects of local pO2. Electron paramagnetic resonance imaging (EPRI) has been considered one of the leading methods for quantitatively imaging pO2 within tumors in vivo. However, current EPRI techniques require relatively long imaging times. Reducing the number of projection scan considerably reduce the imaging time. Conventional image reconstruction algorithms, such as filtered back projection (FBP), may produce severe artifacts in images reconstructed from sparse-view projections. This can lower the utility of these reconstructed images. In this work, an optimization based image reconstruction algorithm using constrained, total variation (TV) minimization, subject to data consistency, is developed and evaluated. The algorithm was evaluated using simulated phantom, physical phantom and pre-clinical EPRI data. The TV algorithm is compared with FBP using subjective and objective metrics. The results demonstrate the merits of the proposed reconstruction algorithm.

Citing Articles

Partial Acquisition of Spectral Projections Accelerates Four-dimensional Spectral-spatial EPR Imaging for Mouse Tumor Models: A Feasibility Study.

Oba M, Taguchi M, Kudo Y, Yamashita K, Yasui H, Matsumoto S Mol Imaging Biol. 2024; 26(3):459-472.

PMID: 38811467 DOI: 10.1007/s11307-024-01924-y.


Directional TV algorithm for fast EPR imaging.

Fang C, Xi Y, Epel B, Halpern H, Qiao Z J Magn Reson. 2024; 361:107652.

PMID: 38457937 PMC: 11091491. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2024.107652.


An iterative reconstruction algorithm without system matrix for EPR imaging.

Qiao Z, Lu Y, Liu P, Epel B, Halpern H J Magn Reson. 2022; 344:107307.

PMID: 36308904 PMC: 11575469. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2022.107307.


A balanced total-variation-Chambolle-Pock algorithm for EPR imaging.

Qiao Z, Redler G, Epel B, Halpern H J Magn Reson. 2021; 328:107009.

PMID: 34058712 PMC: 11866404. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2021.107009.


Algebraic reconstruction of 3D spatial EPR images from high numbers of noisy projections: An improved image reconstruction technique for high resolution fast scan EPR imaging.

Komarov D, Samouilov A, Ahmad R, Zweier J J Magn Reson. 2020; 319:106812.

PMID: 32966948 PMC: 7554188. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2020.106812.


References
1.
Qiao Z, Redler G, Epel B, Halpern H . Comparison of parabolic filtration methods for 3D filtered back projection in pulsed EPR imaging. J Magn Reson. 2014; 248:42-53. PMC: 4324566. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2014.08.010. View

2.
Bian J, Siewerdsen J, Han X, Sidky E, Prince J, Pelizzari C . Evaluation of sparse-view reconstruction from flat-panel-detector cone-beam CT. Phys Med Biol. 2010; 55(22):6575-99. PMC: 3597413. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/55/22/001. View

3.
Pan X, Sidky E, Vannier M . Why do commercial CT scanners still employ traditional, filtered back-projection for image reconstruction?. Inverse Probl. 2011; 25(12):1230009. PMC: 2849113. DOI: 10.1088/0266-5611/25/12/123009. View

4.
Ahn K, Halpern H . Spatially uniform sampling in 4-D EPR spectral-spatial imaging. J Magn Reson. 2007; 185(1):152-8. PMC: 2041928. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2006.12.007. View

5.
Jorgensen J, Sidky E, Pan X . Quantifying admissible undersampling for sparsity-exploiting iterative image reconstruction in X-ray CT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2012; 32(2):460-73. PMC: 3992296. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2012.2230185. View