Literature DB >> 27908179

An evaluation of spatial resolution of a prototype proton CT scanner.

Tia E Plautz1, V Bashkirov2, V Giacometti3, R F Hurley2, R P Johnson1, P Piersimoni4, H F-W Sadrozinski1, R W Schulte2, A Zatserklyaniy1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the spatial resolution of proton CT using both a prototype proton CT scanner and Monte Carlo simulations.
METHODS: A custom cylindrical edge phantom containing twelve tissue-equivalent inserts with four different compositions at varying radial displacements from the axis of rotation was developed for measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF) of a prototype proton CT scanner. Two scans of the phantom, centered on the axis of rotation, were obtained with a 200 MeV, low-intensity proton beam: one scan with steps of 4°, and one scan with the phantom continuously rotating. In addition, Monte Carlo simulations of the phantom scan were performed using scanners idealized to various degrees. The data were reconstructed using an iterative projection method with added total variation superiorization based on individual proton histories. Edge spread functions in the radial and azimuthal directions were obtained using the oversampling technique. These were then used to obtain the modulation transfer functions. The spatial resolution was defined by the 10% value of the modulation transfer function (MTF10%) in units of line pairs per centimeter (lp/cm). Data from the simulations were used to better understand the contributions of multiple Coulomb scattering in the phantom and the scanner hardware, as well as the effect of discretization of proton location.
RESULTS: The radial spatial resolution of the prototype proton CT scanner depends on the total path length, W, of the proton in the phantom, whereas the azimuthal spatial resolution depends both on W and the position, u-, at which the most-likely path uncertainty is evaluated along the path. For protons contributing to radial spatial resolution, W varies with the radial position of the edge, whereas for protons contributing to azimuthal spatial resolution, W is approximately constant. For a pixel size of 0.625 mm, the radial spatial resolution of the image reconstructed from the fully idealized simulation data ranged between 6.31 ± 0.36 lp/cm for W = 197 mm i.e., close to the center of the phantom, and 13.79 ± 0.36 lp/cm for W = 97 mm, near the periphery of the phantom. The azimuthal spatial resolution ranged from 6.99 ± 0.23 lp/cm at u- = 75 mm (near the center) to 11.20 ± 0.26 lp/cm at u- = 20 mm (near the periphery). Multiple Coulomb scattering limits the radial spatial resolution for path lengths greater than approximately 130 mm, and the azimuthal spatial resolution for positions of evaluation greater than approximately 40 mm for W = 199 mm. The radial spatial resolution of the image reconstructed from data from the 4° stepped experimental scan ranged from 5.11 ± 0.61 lp/cm for W = 197 mm to 8.58 ± 0.50 lp/cm for W = 97 mm. In the azimuthal direction, the spatial resolution ranged from 5.37 ± 0.40 lp/cm at u- = 75 mm to 7.27 ± 0.39 lp/cm at u- = 20 mm. The continuous scan achieved the same spatial resolution as that of the stepped scan.
CONCLUSIONS: Multiple Coulomb scattering in the phantom is the limiting physical factor of the achievable spatial resolution of proton CT; additional loss of spatial resolution in the prototype system is associated with scattering in the proton tracking system and inadequacies of the proton path estimate used in the iterative reconstruction algorithm. Improvement in spatial resolution may be achievable by improving the most likely path estimate by incorporating information about high and low density materials, and by minimizing multiple Coulomb scattering in the proton tracking system.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27908179      PMCID: PMC5097050          DOI: 10.1118/1.4966028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  18 in total

1.  Dose calculation models for proton treatment planning using a dynamic beam delivery system: an attempt to include density heterogeneity effects in the analytical dose calculation.

Authors:  B Schaffner; E Pedroni; A Lomax
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  The most likely path of an energetic charged particle through a uniform medium.

Authors:  D C Williams
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2004-07-07       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Total variation superiorization schemes in proton computed tomography image reconstruction.

Authors:  S N Penfold; R W Schulte; Y Censor; A B Rosenfeld
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Novel scintillation detector design and performance for proton radiography and computed tomography.

Authors:  V A Bashkirov; R W Schulte; R F Hurley; R P Johnson; H F-W Sadrozinski; A Zatserklyaniy; T Plautz; V Giacometti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  A simple method for determining the modulation transfer function in digital radiography.

Authors:  H Fujita; D Y Tsai; T Itoh; K Doi; J Morishita; K Ueda; A Ohtsuka
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 10.048

6.  Spatial resolution of proton tomography: Methods, initial phase space and object thickness.

Authors:  Uwe Schneider; Eros Pedroni; Matthias Hartmann; Jürgen Besserer; Tony Lomax
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2011-07-22       Impact factor: 4.820

7.  TOPAS: an innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for research and clinical applications.

Authors:  J Perl; J Shin; J Schumann; B Faddegon; H Paganetti
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  The line spread function and modulation transfer function of a computed tomographic scanner.

Authors:  P F Judy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1976 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  A Fast Experimental Scanner for Proton CT: Technical Performance and First Experience with Phantom Scans.

Authors:  Robert P Johnson; Vladimir Bashkirov; Langley DeWitt; Valentina Giacometti; Robert F Hurley; Pierluigi Piersimoni; Tia E Plautz; Hartmut F-W Sadrozinski; Keith Schubert; Reinhard Schulte; Blake Schultze; Andriy Zatserklyaniy
Journal:  IEEE Trans Nucl Sci       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 1.679

10.  Combining ordered subsets and momentum for accelerated X-ray CT image reconstruction.

Authors:  Donghwan Kim; Sathish Ramani; Jeffrey A Fessler
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 10.048

View more
  9 in total

1.  The effect of beam purity and scanner complexity on proton CT accuracy.

Authors:  P Piersimoni; J Ramos-Méndez; T Geoghegan; V A Bashkirov; R W Schulte; B A Faddegon
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  In vivo range verification in particle therapy.

Authors:  Katia Parodi; Jerimy C Polf
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  Proton therapy delivery: what is needed in the next ten years?

Authors:  Andries N Schreuder; Jacob Shamblin
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  A phantom study comparing low-dose CT physical image quality from five different CT scanners.

Authors:  Yali Li; Yaojun Jiang; Huilong Liu; Xi Yu; Sihui Chen; Duoshan Ma; Jianbo Gao; Yan Wu
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2022-01

5.  The accuracy of helium ion CT based particle therapy range prediction: an experimental study comparing different particle and x-ray CT modalities.

Authors:  L Volz; C-A Collins-Fekete; E Bär; S Brons; C Graeff; R P Johnson; A Runz; C Sarosiek; R W Schulte; J Seco
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  Helium CT: Monte Carlo simulation results for an ideal source and detector with comparison to proton CT.

Authors:  Pierluigi Piersimoni; Bruce A Faddegon; José Ramos Méndez; Reinhard W Schulte; Lennart Volz; Joao Seco
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2018-05-20       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  The impact of secondary fragments on the image quality of helium ion imaging.

Authors:  Lennart Volz; Pierluigi Piersimoni; Vladimir A Bashkirov; Stephan Brons; Charles-Antoine Collins-Fekete; Robert P Johnson; Reinhard W Schulte; Joao Seco
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-10-02       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Analysis of characteristics of images acquired with a prototype clinical proton radiography system.

Authors:  Christina Sarosiek; Ethan A DeJongh; George Coutrakon; Don F DeJongh; Kirk L Duffin; Nicholas T Karonis; Caesar E Ordoñez; Mark Pankuch; Victor Rykalin; John R Winans; James S Welsh
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Helium ion beam imaging for image guided ion radiotherapy.

Authors:  M Martišíková; T Gehrke; S Berke; G Aricò; O Jäkel
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 3.481

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.