Literature DB >> 28380247

A new CT reconstruction technique using adaptive deformation recovery and intensity correction (ADRIC).

You Zhang1, Jianhua Ma2, Puneeth Iyengar1, Yuncheng Zhong1, Jing Wang1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Sequential same-patient CT images may involve deformation-induced and non-deformation-induced voxel intensity changes. An adaptive deformation recovery and intensity correction (ADRIC) technique was developed to improve the CT reconstruction accuracy, and to separate deformation from non-deformation-induced voxel intensity changes between sequential CT images.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: ADRIC views the new CT volume as a deformation of a prior high-quality CT volume, but with additional non-deformation-induced voxel intensity changes. ADRIC first applies the 2D-3D deformation technique to recover the deformation field between the prior CT volume and the new, to-be-reconstructed CT volume. Using the deformation-recovered new CT volume, ADRIC further corrects the non-deformation-induced voxel intensity changes with an updated algebraic reconstruction technique ("ART-dTV"). The resulting intensity-corrected new CT volume is subsequently fed back into the 2D-3D deformation process to further correct the residual deformation errors, which forms an iterative loop. By ADRIC, the deformation field and the non-deformation voxel intensity corrections are optimized separately and alternately to reconstruct the final CT. CT myocardial perfusion imaging scenarios were employed to evaluate the efficacy of ADRIC, using both simulated data of the extended-cardiac-torso (XCAT) digital phantom and experimentally acquired porcine data. The reconstruction accuracy of the ADRIC technique was compared to the technique using ART-dTV alone, and to the technique using 2D-3D deformation alone. The relative error metric and the universal quality index metric are calculated between the images for quantitative analysis. The relative error is defined as the square root of the sum of squared voxel intensity differences between the reconstructed volume and the "ground-truth" volume, normalized by the square root of the sum of squared "ground-truth" voxel intensities. In addition to the XCAT and porcine studies, a physical lung phantom measurement study was also conducted. Water-filled balloons with various shapes/volumes and concentrations of iodinated contrasts were put inside the phantom to simulate both deformations and non-deformation-induced intensity changes for ADRIC reconstruction. The ADRIC-solved deformations and intensity changes from limited-view projections were compared to those of the "gold-standard" volumes reconstructed from fully sampled projections.
RESULTS: For the XCAT simulation study, the relative errors of the reconstructed CT volume by the 2D-3D deformation technique, the ART-dTV technique, and the ADRIC technique were 14.64%, 19.21%, and 11.90% respectively, by using 20 projections for reconstruction. Using 60 projections for reconstruction reduced the relative errors to 12.33%, 11.04%, and 7.92% for the three techniques, respectively. For the porcine study, the corresponding results were 13.61%, 8.78%, and 6.80% by using 20 projections; and 12.14%, 6.91%, and 5.29% by using 60 projections. The ADRIC technique also demonstrated robustness to varying projection exposure levels. For the physical phantom study, the average DICE coefficient between the initial prior balloon volume and the new "gold-standard" balloon volumes was 0.460. ADRIC reconstruction by 21 projections increased the average DICE coefficient to 0.954.
CONCLUSION: The ADRIC technique outperformed both the 2D-3D deformation technique and the ART-dTV technique in reconstruction accuracy. The alternately solved deformation field and non-deformation voxel intensity corrections can benefit multiple clinical applications, including tumor tracking, radiotherapy dose accumulation, and treatment outcome analysis.
© 2017 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT reconstruction; deformation recovery; intensity correction; myocardial perfusion; total variation

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28380247      PMCID: PMC5498224          DOI: 10.1002/mp.12259

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


  53 in total

1.  4D Cone-beam CT reconstruction using a motion model based on principal component analysis.

Authors:  David Staub; Alen Docef; Robert S Brock; Constantin Vaman; Martin J Murphy
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Evaluation of on-board kV cone beam CT (CBCT)-based dose calculation.

Authors:  Yong Yang; Eduard Schreibmann; Tianfang Li; Chuang Wang; Lei Xing
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-01-12       Impact factor: 3.609

3.  Noise and resolution in images reconstructed with FBP and OSC algorithms for CT.

Authors:  A Ziegler; T Köhler; R Proksa
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Simultaneous iterative reconstruction technique software for spectral-spatial EPR imaging.

Authors:  Martin Spitzbarth; Malte Drescher
Journal:  J Magn Reson       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 2.229

5.  A pilot evaluation of a 4-dimensional cone-beam computed tomographic scheme based on simultaneous motion estimation and image reconstruction.

Authors:  Jun Dang; Xuejun Gu; Tinsu Pan; Jing Wang
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-02-01       Impact factor: 7.038

6.  Algebraic reconstruction techniques (ART) for three-dimensional electron microscopy and x-ray photography.

Authors:  R Gordon; R Bender; G T Herman
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  1970-12       Impact factor: 2.691

Review 7.  CT coronary angiography: 256-slice and 320-detector row scanners.

Authors:  Edward M Hsiao; Frank J Rybicki; Michael Steigner
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.931

8.  PIRPLE: a penalized-likelihood framework for incorporation of prior images in CT reconstruction.

Authors:  J Webster Stayman; Hao Dang; Yifu Ding; Jeffrey H Siewerdsen
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-10       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Dosimetric verification of lung cancer treatment using the CBCTs estimated from limited-angle on-board projections.

Authors:  You Zhang; Fang-Fang Yin; Lei Ren
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Realistic CT simulation using the 4D XCAT phantom.

Authors:  W P Segars; M Mahesh; T J Beck; E C Frey; B M W Tsui
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Application of the 4-D XCAT Phantoms in Biomedical Imaging and Beyond.

Authors:  W Paul Segars; B M W Tsui; George S K Fung; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 10.048

2.  [Total generalized variation minimization based on projection data for low?dose CT reconstruction].

Authors:  Shan-Zhou Niu; Heng Wu; Ze-Feng Yu; Zi-Jun Zheng; Gao-Hang Yu
Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao       Date:  2017-12-20

3.  A biomechanical modeling-guided simultaneous motion estimation and image reconstruction technique (SMEIR-Bio) for 4D-CBCT reconstruction.

Authors:  Xiaokun Huang; You Zhang; Jing Wang
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-02-08       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Nonlocal low-rank and sparse matrix decomposition for spectral CT reconstruction.

Authors:  Shanzhou Niu; Gaohang Yu; Jianhua Ma; Jing Wang
Journal:  Inverse Probl       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 2.407

5.  Iterative reconstruction for photon-counting CT using prior image constrained total generalized variation.

Authors:  Shanzhou Niu; You Zhang; Yuncheng Zhong; Guoliang Liu; Shaohui Lu; Xile Zhang; Shengzhou Hu; Tinghua Wang; Gaohang Yu; Jing Wang
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 4.589

6.  Performance of sparse-view CT reconstruction with multi-directional gradient operators.

Authors:  Chia-Jui Hsieh; Shih-Chun Jin; Jyh-Cheng Chen; Chih-Wei Kuo; Ruei-Teng Wang; Woei-Chyn Chu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Virtual clinical trials in medical imaging: a review.

Authors:  Ehsan Abadi; William P Segars; Benjamin M W Tsui; Paul E Kinahan; Nick Bottenus; Alejandro F Frangi; Andrew Maidment; Joseph Lo; Ehsan Samei
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2020-04-11

8.  Advanced 4-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography reconstruction by combining motion estimation, motion-compensated reconstruction, biomechanical modeling and deep learning.

Authors:  You Zhang; Xiaokun Huang; Jing Wang
Journal:  Vis Comput Ind Biomed Art       Date:  2019-12-12
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.