Reconstruction of a cone-beam CT image via forward iterative projection matching.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of reconstructing a cone-beam CT (CBCT) image by deformably altering a prior fan-beam CT (FBCT) image such that it matches the anatomy portrayed in the CBCT projection data set.
METHODS: A prior FBCT image of the patient is assumed to be available as a source image. A CBCT projection data set is obtained and used as a target image set. A parametrized deformation model is applied to the source FBCT image, digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) that emulate the CBCT projection image geometry are calculated and compared to the target CBCT projection data, and the deformation model parameters are adjusted iteratively until the DRRs optimally match the CBCT projection data set. The resulting deformed FBCT image is hypothesized to be an accurate representation of the patient's anatomy imaged by the CBCT system. The process is demonstrated via numerical simulation. A known deformation is applied to a prior FBCT image and used to create a synthetic set of CBCT target projections. The iterative projection matching process is then applied to reconstruct the deformation represented in the synthetic target projections; the reconstructed deformation is then compared to the known deformation. The sensitivity of the process to the number of projections and the DRR/CBCT projection mismatch is explored by systematically adding noise to and perturbing the contrast of the target projections relative to the iterated source DRRs and by reducing the number of projections.
RESULTS: When there is no noise or contrast mismatch in the CBCT projection images, a set of 64 projections allows the known deformed CT image to be reconstructed to within a nRMS error of 1% and the known deformation to within a nRMS error of 7%. A CT image nRMS error of less than 4% is maintained at noise levels up to 3% of the mean projection intensity, at which the deformation error is 13%. At 1% noise level, the number of projections can be reduced to 8 while maintaining CT image and deformation errors of less than 4% and 13%, respectively. The method is sensitive to contrast mismatch between the simulated projections and the target projections when the soft-tissue contrast in the projections is low.
CONCLUSIONS: By using prior knowledge available in a FBCT image, the authors show that a CBCT image can be iteratively reconstructed from a comparatively small number of projection images, thus saving acquisition time and reducing imaging dose. This will enable more frequent daily imaging during radiation therapy. Because the process preserves the CT numbers of the FBCT image, the resulting 3D image intensities will be more accurate than a CBCT image reconstructed via conventional backprojection methods. Reconstruction errors are insensitive to noise at levels beyond what would typically be found in CBCT projection data, but are sensitive to contrast mismatch errors between the CBCT projection data and the DRRs.