Georg Bier1, Malte Niklas Bongers2, Hendrik Ditt3, Benjamin Bender4, Ulrike Ernemann4, Marius Horger2. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls-University Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. georghomann@web.de. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Eberhard Karls-University Tuebingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany. 3. Imaging & Therapy Division, Siemens AG Healthcare Sector, Forchheim, Germany. 4. Department of Neuroradiology, Eberhard Karls-University Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The aim if this study is to find out if contrast between gray (GM) and white matter (WM) on non-enhanced brain CT (NECT) can be enhanced by using a frequency selective non-linear blending. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients (40 % female; mean age 67.73 ± 12.71 years), who underwent NECT of the brain, were retrospectively included in this study. Brain scan readings were performed by two radiologists independently, for NECT and subsequently the images were read using a new frequency selective non-linear blending algorithm (best contrast, BC). Optimal settings of BC for enhanced delineation of anatomical structures were set at an averaged center of 30 HU, averaged delta of 5 HU, and a slope of 5. For contrast-to-noise ratio calculation (CNR), gray and white matter attenuation values were measured for both NECT and BC in different anatomical structures. RESULTS: CNR increase in the gray matter was 5.91 ± 2.45 for the cortical gray matter and 4.41 ± 1.82 for the basal ganglia. The contrast ratio between cortical gray and white matter was 1.87 and 1.7 (basal ganglia/WM) for BC quantification vs. 1.43 (cortex/WM) and 1.33 (basal ganglia/WM) for standard NECT (both p < 0.0001). Improved CNR did not depend on the anatomical structures measured. CONCLUSION: Frequency selective non-linear blending allows better discrimination between WM and GM and therefore may enhance diagnostic accuracy of NECT.
INTRODUCTION: The aim if this study is to find out if contrast between gray (GM) and white matter (WM) on non-enhanced brain CT (NECT) can be enhanced by using a frequency selective non-linear blending. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients (40 % female; mean age 67.73 ± 12.71 years), who underwent NECT of the brain, were retrospectively included in this study. Brain scan readings were performed by two radiologists independently, for NECT and subsequently the images were read using a new frequency selective non-linear blending algorithm (best contrast, BC). Optimal settings of BC for enhanced delineation of anatomical structures were set at an averaged center of 30 HU, averaged delta of 5 HU, and a slope of 5. For contrast-to-noise ratio calculation (CNR), gray and white matter attenuation values were measured for both NECT and BC in different anatomical structures. RESULTS: CNR increase in the gray matter was 5.91 ± 2.45 for the cortical gray matter and 4.41 ± 1.82 for the basal ganglia. The contrast ratio between cortical gray and white matter was 1.87 and 1.7 (basal ganglia/WM) for BC quantification vs. 1.43 (cortex/WM) and 1.33 (basal ganglia/WM) for standard NECT (both p < 0.0001). Improved CNR did not depend on the anatomical structures measured. CONCLUSION: Frequency selective non-linear blending allows better discrimination between WM and GM and therefore may enhance diagnostic accuracy of NECT.
Authors: A Korn; M Fenchel; B Bender; S Danz; T K Hauser; D Ketelsen; T Flohr; C D Claussen; M Heuschmid; U Ernemann; H Brodoefel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Stefan Knecht; Heike Wersching; Hubertus Lohmann; Maximilian Bruchmann; Thomas Duning; Rainer Dziewas; Klaus Berger; E Bernd Ringelstein Journal: Hypertension Date: 2008-02-04 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Carter Craddock; Michael Y Chen; Robert L Dixon; Christopher A Schlarb; Daniel W Williams Journal: J Comput Assist Tomogr Date: 2006 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: M J Post; L G Tate; R M Quencer; G T Hensley; J R Berger; W A Sheremata; G Maul Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1988-08 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: J-E Scholtz; K Hüsers; M Kaup; M Albrecht; B Schulz; C Frellesen; B Bodelle; J Wagenblast; J M Kerl; R W Bauer; T Lehnert; T J Vogl; J L Wichmann Journal: Clin Radiol Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 2.350
Authors: Sven Schneeweiss; Michael Esser; Wolfgang Thaiss; Hans Boesmueller; Hendrik Ditt; Konstantin Nikolau; Marius Horger Journal: Acta Radiol Open Date: 2017-07-10