Comparison between two super-resolution implementations in PET imaging

Super-resolution (SR) techniques are used in PET imaging to generate a high-resolution image by combining multiple low-resolution images that have been acquired from different points of view (POV). In this article, the authors propose a novel implementation of the SR technique whereby the required multiple low-resolution images are generated by shifting the reconstruction pixel grid during the image reconstruction process rather than being acquired from different POVs. The objective of this article is to compare the performances of the two SR implementations using theoretical and experimental studies. A mathematical framework is first provided to support the hypothesis that the two SR implementations have similar performance in current PET/CT scanners that use block detectors. Based on this framework, a simulation study, a point source study, and a NEMA/IEC phantom study were conducted to compare the performance of these two SR implementations with respect to contrast, resolution, noise, and SNR. For reference purposes, a comparison with a native reconstruction (NR) image using a high-resolution pixel grid was also performed. The mathematical framework showed that the two SR implementations are expected to achieve similar contrast and resolution but different noise contents. These results were confirmed by the simulation and experimental studies. The simulation study showed that the two SR implementations have an average contrast difference of 2.3%, while the point source study showed that their average differences in contrast and resolution were 0.5% and 1.2%, respectively. Comparisons between the SR and NR images for the point source study showed that the NR image exhibited averages of 30% and 8% lower contrast and resolution, respectively. The NEMA/IEC phantom study showed that the three images (two SR and NR) exhibited different noise structures. The SNR of the new SR implementation was, on average, 21.5% lower than the original implementation largely due to an increase in background noise, while the NR image had averages of 18.5% and 8% lower SNR and contrast, respectively, versus the two SR images. The new SR implementation can potentially replace the original SR approach in current PET scanners that use block detectors while maintaining similar contrast and resolution, but at a relatively lower SNR. A major advantage of the new SR implementation is its shorter overall scan duration which results in an increase in scanner throughput and a reduction in patient motion.