The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 34 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
PET image denoising using unsupervised deep learning
Open accessAbstract
Image quality of positron emission tomography (PET) is limited by various physical degradation factors. Our study aims to perform PET image denoising by utilizing prior information from the same patient. The proposed method is based on unsupervised deep learning, where no training pairs are needed. In this method, the prior high-quality image from the patient was employed as the network input and the noisy PET image itself was treated as the training label. Constrained by the network structure and the prior image input, the network was trained to learn the intrinsic structure information from the noisy image and output a restored PET image. To validate the performance of the proposed method, a computer simulation study based on the BrainWeb phantom was first performed. A 68Ga-PRGD2 PET/CT dataset containing 10 patients and a 18F-FDG PET/MR dataset containing 30 patients were later on used for clinical data evaluation. The Gaussian, non-local mean (NLM) using CT/MR image as priors, BM4D, and Deep Decoder methods were included as reference methods. The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) improvements were used to rank different methods based on Wilcoxon signed-rank test. For the simulation study, contrast recovery coefficient (CRC) vs. standard deviation (STD) curves showed that the proposed method achieved the best performance regarding the bias-variance tradeoff. For the clinical PET/CT dataset, the proposed method achieved the highest CNR improvement ratio (53.35% ± 21.78%), compared with the Gaussian (12.64% ± 6.15%, P = 0.002), NLM guided by CT (24.35% ± 16.30%, P = 0.002), BM4D (38.31% ± 20.26%, P = 0.002), and Deep Decoder (41.67% ± 22.28%, P = 0.002) methods. For the clinical PET/MR dataset, the CNR improvement ratio of the proposed method achieved 46.80% ± 25.23%, higher than the Gaussian (18.16% ± 10.02%, P < 0.0001), NLM guided by MR (25.36% ± 19.48%, P < 0.0001), BM4D (37.02% ± 21.38%, P < 0.0001), and Deep Decoder (30.03% ± 20.64%, P < 0.0001) methods. Restored images for all the datasets demonstrate that the proposed method can effectively smooth out the noise while recovering image details. The proposed unsupervised deep learning framework provides excellent image restoration effects, outperforming the Gaussian, NLM methods, BM4D, and Deep Decoder methods.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization
Kingma, D. P., & Ba, J. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 · Cited by 98,946
Conditional Generative Adversarial Nets
Mirza, M., & Osindero, S. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1411.1784 · Cited by 8,863
On the limited memory BFGS method for large scale optimization
Liu, D. C., & Nocedal, J. (1989) · Mathematical Programming · doi:10.1007/bf01589116 · Cited by 8,560
3D U-Net: Learning Dense Volumetric Segmentation from Sparse Annotation
Çiçek, Ö., Abdulkadir, A., Lienkamp, S. S., Brox, T., & Ronneberger, O. (2016) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46723-8_49 · Cited by 7,945
He, K., Sun, J., & Tang, X. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.213 · Cited by 5,546
Lempitsky, V., Vedaldi, A., & Ulyanov, D. (2018) · 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00984 · Cited by 1,916
A combined PET/CT scanner for clinical oncology.
Beyer, T., Townsend, D. W., Brun, T., Kinahan, P. E., Charron, M., Roddy, R., Jerin, J., Young, J., Byars, L. G., & Nutt, R. (2000) · PubMed · Cited by 1,659
Recommendations on the Use of 18F-FDG PET in Oncology
Fletcher, J. W., Djulbegovic, B., Soares, H. P., Siegel, B. A., Lowe, V. J., Lyman, G. H., Coleman, R. E., Wahl, R., Paschold, J. C., Avril, N., et al. (2008) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine · doi:10.2967/jnumed.107.047787 · Cited by 1,101
Nonlocal Transform-Domain Filter for Volumetric Data Denoising and Reconstruction
Maggioni, M., Katkovnik, V., Egiazarian, K., & Foi, A. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2012.2210725 · Cited by 1,002
A method for unconstrained convex minimization problem with the rate of convergence o(1/k^2)
Nesterov, Y. E. (1983) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 865
Cited by
Deep Learning on Image Denoising: An overview
Tian, C., Fei, L., Zheng, W., Xu, Y., Zuo, W., & Lin, C.-W. (2020) · Neural Networks · doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2020.07.025 · Cited by 1,091
Multimodal Deep Learning Approaches for Precision Oncology: A Comprehensive Review
Yang, H., Yang, M., Chen, J., Yao, G., Zou, Q., & Jia, L. (2024) · Briefings in Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bib/bbae699 · Cited by 115
Metadata
- Authors
- Cui, J., Gong, K., Guo, N., Wu, C., Meng, X., Kim, K., Zheng, K., Wu, Z., Fu, L., Xu, B., Zhu, Z., Tian, J., Liu, H., & Li, Q.
- Venue
- European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
- Published
- 2019-08-29
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 2780-2789
- ISSN
- 1619-7070 (ISSN-L)
- 1619-7089
- OpenAlex
- W2970280802
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 34
- FWCI
- 14.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: PET image denoising using unsupervised deep learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00259-019-04468-4
- The paper
- Cui, J., Gong, K., Guo, N., Wu, C., Meng, X., Kim, K., Zheng, K., Wu, Z., Fu, L., Xu, B., Zhu, Z., Tian, J., Liu, H., & Li, Q. (2019). PET image denoising using unsupervised deep learning. European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-019-04468-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.