Static images for 30 minutes post-injection were obtained by microPET and visualized in the view mode of the PMOD software after reconstruction (
Figure 2). [
18F] FPTP microPET provided a clear view of the MI area. The OSEM3D reconstruction method provided the smoothest images, followed by 3DRP, FBP, and OSEM2D.
The accuracy of short-axis images generated by each reconstruction method was compared with that of TTC-stained myocardium from corresponding animals (
Figure 3A and
B). The location of the MI on PET images corresponded well to that observed upon TTC staining (arrow of
Figure 3A and
B). To measure the infarct size on PET images, myocardial perfusions in polar map images (reconstructed by FBP, OSEM2D, OSEM3D, or 3DRP) were obtained using the cardiac modeling tool in PMOD to demonstrate the MI region (
Figure 3C). The defect area was observed in the apex and the left circumflex artery (LCX) area on the heart polar map. The size of the stained region on TTC photographs was compared with the defect size calculated from polar map images generated using the different reconstruction methods. The infarction size measured via the four reconstruction methods was similarly measured with TTC (
Table 1). The average infarction size of TTC was 29.23 ± 6.19. On the heart polar maps, the average infarction sizes of FBP, OSEM2D, OSEM3D, and 3DRP were 27.94 ± 8.17, 30.88 ± 9.30, 29.41 ± 7.70 and 27.94 ± 8.17, respectively. OSEM3D reflected the change rate of infarction size better than other methods. The correlation was highest in polar map images with a threshold of 60% and reconstructed by OSEM3D (r = 0.994, P < 0.001), followed by 3DRP (r = 0.976, P < 0.001), FBP (r = 0.982, P < 0.001), and OSEM2D (r = 0.812, P = 0.014).
We next evaluated average perfusion values in the normal and infarcted areas of the polar maps. The average perfusion values measured in normal myocardium using each of the four algorithms (FBP, OSEM2D, OSEM3D, and 3DRP) were 86.75, 87.60, 86.06, and 87.40%, respectively, while those in the infarction area were 39.17, 39.05, 38.22, and 41.84%, respectively (
Figure 4A). In normal segments, a significant difference in average perfusion was found between OSEM2D and OSEM3D (P = 0.038). In infarcted segments, the average perfusion calculated using the 3DRP algorithm was significantly higher than that calculated using OSEM2D (P = 0.028) or OSEM3D (P = 0.008). We also compared image contrast, as calculated from the maximal and minimal pixel values of the myocardial perfusion polar maps reconstructed by each of the four algorithms. Mean image contrast measured in PET images reconstructed using FBP, OSEM2D, OSEM3D, and 3DRP (from 8 MI rats) was 55.30, 56.91, 60.39, and 54.91%, respectively (
Figure 4B). The OSEM3D reconstruction method provided the highest image contrast; significantly better than FBP (P = 0.005) and 3DRP (P = 0.005), but not OSEM2D (P = 0.093). There was no significant difference between FBP and OSEM2D (P = 0.646), FBP and 3DRP (P = 0.333), or OSEM2D and 3DRP (P = 0.203).
Finally, we also calculated the summation of score (total score) in each the reconstruction method (
Figure 5). The OSEM3D method achieved a total score of 45, followed by 3DRP, FBP, and OSEM2D (with scores of 35, 25, and 39, respectively).