| Literature DB >> 24489533 |
Liviu-Teodor Chira1, Corneliu Rusu2, Clovis Tauber3, Jean-Marc Girault3.
Abstract
The blind deconvolution of ultrasound sequences in medical ultrasound technique is still a major problem despite the efforts made. This paper presents a blind noninverse deconvolution algorithm to eliminate the blurring effect, using the envelope of the acquired radio-frequency sequences and a priori Laplacian distribution for deconvolved signal. The algorithm is executed in two steps. Firstly, the point spread function is automatically estimated from the measured data. Secondly, the data are reconstructed in a nonblind way using proposed algorithm. The algorithm is a nonlinear blind deconvolution which works as a greedy algorithm. The results on simulated signals and real images are compared with different state of the art methods deconvolution. Our method shows good results for scatters detection, speckle noise suppression, and execution time.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24489533 PMCID: PMC3893842 DOI: 10.1155/2013/496067
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Biomed Imaging ISSN: 1687-4188
Algorithm 1Noninverse greedy deconvolution.
Figure 1Simulated signals. (a) The generated reflectivity function. (b) The generated PSF. (c) The resulted RF signal and its envelope.
Figure 2Simulated signals results. (a) Envelope of the simulated RF signal; (b) results obtained with our algorithm; (c) results obtained with l 1-norm; (d) results obtained with Wiener filter; (e) results obtained with TV-norm. All signals are superimposed over original reflectivity function (dotted signal).
Comparison of different restoration techniques according to nMSE (n-Mean Square Error) from (10) and RG (resolution gain). RG is a parameter which evaluates the level of decorrelation for speckle noise in the resulted signal.
| Methods | SNR = 7 dB | SNR = 14 dB | SNR = 21 dB | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| RG |
| RG |
| RG | |
| Our method | 1.36 | 17.56 | 1.17 | 15.48 | 1.05 | 14.28 |
|
| 1.18 | 17.04 | 1.11 | 15.02 | 0.98 | 13.82 |
| Wiener | 2.82 | 2.15 | 2.62 | 1.68 | 2.69 | 1.52 |
| TV-norm | 2.52 | 0.76 | 2.33 | 0.87 | 2.32 | 0.91 |
Execution time evaluation for tested algorithms.
| Our alg. |
| Wiener | TV-norm | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time (s) | 0.002 | 19.01 | 0.7 | 3.83 |
Real scatters detection according to their density.
| Density | Method | SNR (dB) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | 10 | 15 | 20 | 25 | ||
| 2% | Our. alg. | 9.05 | 9.07 | 9.07 | 9.12 | 9.15 |
| Wiener | 8.38 | 8.76 | 8.68 | 8.68 | 8.86 | |
|
| 8.94 | 8.95 | 8.92 | 8.96 | 8.94 | |
|
| ||||||
| 5% | Our. alg. | 18.9 | 19.00 | 19.68 | 19.72 | 20.06 |
| Wiener | 18.48 | 19.56 | 19.62 | 19.78 | 19.88 | |
|
| 18.6 | 19.06 | 19.70 | 19.74 | 19.98 | |
|
| ||||||
| 10% | Our. alg. | 37.62 | 37.94 | 37.62 | 38.30 | 39.02 |
| Wiener | 34.34 | 34.62 | 34.74 | 34.8 | 35.16 | |
|
| 38.62 | 39.50 | 39.80 | 39.56 | 39.92 | |
Figure 3Measured signals results. (a) Envelope of measured signal; (b) results obtained with our algorithm; (c) results obtained with l 1-norm; (d) results obtained with Wiener filter; (e) results obtained with TV-norm.
Resolution gain evaluation on measured signals.
| Criteria | Our alg. |
| Wiener | TV-norm |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RG | 15 | 15 | 3 | 1 |
Figure 4(a) Original data; (b) proposed method; (c) l 1-norm method; (d) Wiener filtering; and (e) TV-norm method.