OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this work was to measure and compare the iodine contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between a commercial energy-integrating detector (EID) computed tomography (CT) system and a photon-counting detector (PCD) CT scanner capable of human imaging at clinical dose rates, as well as to determine clinical feasibility using human cadavers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A research dual-source PCD-CT scanner was used, where the "A" tube/detector subsystem used an EID and the "B" tube/detector subsystem used a PCD. Iodine CNR was measured in 4 anthropomorphic phantoms, simulating 4 patient sizes, at 4 tube potential settings. After biospecimen committee approval, PCD scans were performed on a fresh-frozen human head and a whole-body cadaver using clinical dose rates. Scans were repeated using the EID and identical parameters, and qualitative side-by-side comparisons were performed. RESULTS: For the same photon fluence, phantom measurements demonstrated a mean increase in CNR of 11%, 23%, 31%, 38% for the PCD system, relative to the EID system, at 80, 100, 120, and 140 kV, respectively. Photon-counting detector CT additionally provided energy-selective imaging, where low- and high-energy images reflected the energy dependence of the iodine signal. Photon-counting detector images of cadaveric anatomy demonstrated decreased beam hardening and calcium blooming in the high-energy bin images and increased contrast in the low-energy bins images relative to the EID images. Threshold-based PCD images were qualitatively deemed equivalent in other aspects. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated research PCD-CT system was capable of clinical levels of image quality at clinical dose rates. It further provided improved CNR relative to state-of-the-art EID-CT. The energy-selective bin images provide further opportunity for dual-energy and multienergy analyses.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this work was to measure and compare the iodine contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between a commercial energy-integrating detector (EID) computed tomography (CT) system and a photon-counting detector (PCD) CT scanner capable of human imaging at clinical dose rates, as well as to determine clinical feasibility using human cadavers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A research dual-source PCD-CT scanner was used, where the "A" tube/detector subsystem used an EID and the "B" tube/detector subsystem used a PCD. Iodine CNR was measured in 4 anthropomorphic phantoms, simulating 4 patient sizes, at 4 tube potential settings. After biospecimen committee approval, PCD scans were performed on a fresh-frozen human head and a whole-body cadaver using clinical dose rates. Scans were repeated using the EID and identical parameters, and qualitative side-by-side comparisons were performed. RESULTS: For the same photon fluence, phantom measurements demonstrated a mean increase in CNR of 11%, 23%, 31%, 38% for the PCD system, relative to the EID system, at 80, 100, 120, and 140 kV, respectively. Photon-counting detector CT additionally provided energy-selective imaging, where low- and high-energy images reflected the energy dependence of the iodine signal. Photon-counting detector images of cadaveric anatomy demonstrated decreased beam hardening and calcium blooming in the high-energy bin images and increased contrast in the low-energy bins images relative to the EID images. Threshold-based PCD images were qualitatively deemed equivalent in other aspects. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated research PCD-CT system was capable of clinical levels of image quality at clinical dose rates. It further provided improved CNR relative to state-of-the-art EID-CT. The energy-selective bin images provide further opportunity for dual-energy and multienergy analyses.
Authors: Dipanjan Pan; Ewald Roessl; Jens-Peter Schlomka; Shelton D Caruthers; Angana Senpan; Mike J Scott; John S Allen; Huiying Zhang; Grace Hu; Patrick J Gaffney; Eric T Choi; Volker Rasche; Samuel A Wickline; Roland Proksa; Gregory M Lanza Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2010-12-10 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: J P Schlomka; E Roessl; R Dorscheid; S Dill; G Martens; T Istel; C Bäumer; C Herrmann; R Steadman; G Zeitler; A Livne; R Proksa Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2008-07-08 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Katsuyuki Taguchi; Mengxi Zhang; Eric C Frey; Xiaolan Wang; Jan S Iwanczyk; Einar Nygard; Neal E Hartsough; Benjamin M W Tsui; William C Barber Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Jan S Iwanczyk; Einar Nygård; Oded Meirav; Jerry Arenson; William C Barber; Neal E Hartsough; Nail Malakhov; Jan C Wessel Journal: IEEE Trans Nucl Sci Date: 2009 Impact factor: 1.679
Authors: Thomas Koenig; Julia Schulze; Marcus Zuber; Kristian Rink; Jochen Butzer; Elias Hamann; Angelica Cecilia; Andreas Zwerger; Alex Fauler; Michael Fiederle; Uwe Oelfke Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2012-10-03 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Wei Zhou; David J Bartlett; Felix E Diehn; Katrina N Glazebrook; Amy L Kotsenas; Rickey E Carter; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough; Shuai Leng Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 6.016
Authors: Shuai Leng; Michael Bruesewitz; Shengzhen Tao; Kishore Rajendran; Ahmed F Halaweish; Norbert G Campeau; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Radiographics Date: 2019 May-Jun Impact factor: 5.333
Authors: Shuai Leng; Zhicong Yu; Ahmed Halaweish; Steffen Kappler; Katharina Hahn; Andre Henning; Zhoubo Li; John Lane; David L Levin; Steven Jorgensen; Erik Ritman; Cynthia McCollough Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2016-12-22
Authors: Wei Zhou; Dilbar Abdurakhimova; Michael Bruesewitz; Ahmed Halaweish; Cynthia H McCollough; Shuai Leng Journal: Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng Date: 2018-03