Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Automated MTF measurement in CT images with a simple wire phantom Cover

Automated MTF measurement in CT images with a simple wire phantom

Polish Journal of Medical Physics and Engineering
Volume 25 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)
By: Choirul Anam,  Toshioh Fujibuchi,  Freddy Haryanto,  Wahyu Setia Budi,  Heri Sutanto,  Kusworo Adi,  Zaenul Muhlisin and  Geoff Dougherty  
Open Access
|Aug 2019

References

  1. [1] Verdun FR, Racine D, Ott JG, et al. Image quality in CT: From physical measurements to model observers. Phys Med. 2015;31(8):823-843.10.1016/j.ejmp.2015.08.00726459319
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  2. [2] International Atomic Energy Agency. Status of computed tomography: Dosimetry for wide cone beam scanners. IAEA-Human Health Reports No 5. 2011.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  3. [3] Kalender WA, Seissler W, Klotz E, Vock P. Spiral volumetric CT with single-breath-hold technique, continuous transport, and continuous scanner rotation. Radiology. 1990;176(1):181-183.10.1148/radiology.176.1.23530882353088
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  4. [4] McCollough CH, Zink FE. Performance evaluation of a multi-slice CT system. Med Phys. 1999;26(11):2223-2230.10.1118/1.59877710587202
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  5. [5] McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: topics in CT—radiation dose in CT. RadioGraphics. 2002;22(6):1541-1553.10.1148/rg.22602512812432127
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  6. [6] Primak AN, McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, et al. Relationship between noise, dose, and pitch in cardiac multi–detector row CT. RadioGraphics. 2006;26(6):1785-1794.10.1148/rg.26606506317102050
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  7. [7] Wilson JM, Christianson OI, Richard S, Samei E. A methodology for image quality evaluation of advanced CT systems. Med Phys. 2013;40(3):031908.10.1118/1.479164523464323
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  8. [8] Anam C, Haryanto F, Widita R, Arif I. New noise reduction method for reducing CT scan dose: Combining Wiener filtering and edge detection algorithm. AIP Conference Proceedings. 2015;1677:040004.10.1063/1.4930648
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  9. [9] McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, McNitt-Gray MF, et al. The phantom portion of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Computed Tomography (CT) accreditation program: Practical tips, artifact examples, and pitfalls to avoid. Med Phys. 2004;31(9):2423-2442.10.1118/1.176963215487722
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  10. [10] Kayugawa A, Ohkubo M, Wada S. Accurate determination of CT point-spread-function with high precision. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013;14(4):216-226.10.1120/jacmp.v14i4.3905571453923835372
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  11. [11] Friedman SN, Fung GSK, Siewerdsen JH, Tsui BMW. A simple approach to measure computed tomography (CT) modulation transfer function (MTF) and noise-power spectrum (NPS) using the American College of Radiology (ACR) accreditation phantom. Med Phys. 2013;40(5):051907.10.1118/1.4800795364398423635277
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  12. [12] Judy PF. The line spread function and modulation transfer function of a computed tomographic scanner. Med Phys. 1976;3(4):233-236.10.1118/1.594283785200
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  13. [13] Droege RT, Morin RL. A practical method to measure the MTF of CT scanners. Med Phys. 1982;9(5):758-760.10.1118/1.5951247155079
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  14. [14] Nickoloff EL Riley R. A simplified approach for modulation transfer function determinations in computed tomography. Med Phys. 1985;12(4):437-442.10.1118/1.5957064033588
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  15. [15] Samei E, Ranger NT, Dobbins JT, Chen Y. Intercomparison of methods for image quality characterization. I. Modulation transfer function. Med Phys. 2006;33(5):1454-1465.10.1118/1.2188819
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  16. [16] Narváez M, Graffigna JP, Gómez ME, Romo R. Application of oversampling to obtain the MTF of digital radiology equipment. J Phys Conf Ser. 2016;705(1):012057.10.1088/1742-6596/705/1/012057
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  17. [17] Takenaga T, Katsuragawa S, Goto M, et al. Modulation transfer function measurement of CT images by use of a circular edge method with a logistic curve-fitting technique. Radiol Phys Technol. 2015;8(1):53-59.10.1007/s12194-014-0286-x25142743
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  18. [18] Ichikawa K, Hara T, Niwa S, Ohashi K. Method of measuring modulation transfer function using metal wire in computed tomography. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2008;64(6):672-680.10.6009/jjrt.64.67218648156
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  19. [19] Anam C, Fujibuchi T, Budi WS, et al. An algorithm for automated modulation transfer function measurement using an edge of a PMMA phantom: Impact of field of view on spatial resolution of CT images. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018;19(6):244-252.10.1002/acm2.12476623684130338920
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  20. [20] Jun-Yan R, Guo-Tao F, Cun-Feng W, et al. Measurement of spatial resolution of the micro-CT system. Chinese Physics C. 2010;34(3):412-416.10.1088/1674-1137/34/3/022
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  21. [21] Arabi H, Asl ARK, Aghamiri SM. The effect of focal spot size on the spatial resolution of variable resolution X-ray CT Scanner. Iran J Radiat Res. 2010;8(1):37-43.10.1109/ICBME.2010.5704967
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  22. [22] Venema HW. Modulation transfer functions of single-slice and dual-slice computed tomography scanners. Med Phys. 1996;23(11):1863-1864.10.1118/1.5978988947898
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  23. [23] Löve A, Olsson M-L, Siemund R, et al. Six iterative reconstruction algorithms in brain CT: a phantom study on image quality at different radiation dose levels. Br J Radiol. 2013;86:20130388.10.1259/bjr.20130388383043624049128
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  24. [24] Dodge CT, Tamm EP, Cody DD, et al. Performance evaluation of iterative reconstruction algorithms for achieving CT radiation dose reduction – a phantom study. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016;17(2):511-531.10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5709587504627074454
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  25. [25] Anam C, Haryanto F, Widita R, et al. An investigation of spatial resolution and noise in reconstructed CT images using iterative reconstruction (IR) and filtered back-projection (FBP). J Phys Conf Series. 2019;1127:012016.10.1088/1742-6596/1127/1/012016
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  26. [26] Sanders J, Hurwitz L, Samei E. Patient-specific quantification of image quality: An automated method for measuring spatial resolution in clinical CT images. Med Phys. 2015;43(10):5330-5338.10.1118/1.496198427782718
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  27. [27] Mori I, Machida Y. Deriving the modulation transfer function of CT from extremely noisy edge profiles. Radiol Phys Technol. 2009;2(1):22-32.10.1007/s12194-008-0039-920821125
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  28. [28] Garayoa J, Castro P. A study on image quality provided by a kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013;14(1):239-257.10.1120/jacmp.v14i1.3888571405223318380
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  29. [29] Boone JM, Seibert JA. An analytical edge spread function model for computer fitting and subsequent calculation of the LSF and MTF. Med Phys. 1994;21(1):1541-1545.10.1118/1.597264
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  30. [30] CIRS. AAPM CT Performance Phantom Model 610. http://www.cirsinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/610-DS-120418.pdf
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  31. [31] Sun Nuclear. CT ACR 464 Phantom. https://www.sunnuclear.com/documents/datasheets/gammex/CTACRPhantom_D013118.pdf
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  32. [32] The Phantom Laboratory. Catphan® 500 and 600 Manual. https://imagingequipment.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Catphan-500600-Manual.pdf
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  33. [33] Anam C, Budi WS, Fujibuchi T, et al. Validation of the tail replacement method in MTF calculations using the homogeneous and non-homogeneous edges of a phantom. J Phys Conf Series 2019;1248:012001.10.1088/1742-6596/1248/1/012001
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  34. [34] Yin FF, Giger ML, Doi K. Measurement of presampling modulation transfer function of film digitizers using a curve fitting technique. Med Phys. 1990;17(6):962-966.10.1118/1.5964632280739
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  35. [35] Anam C, Fujibuchi T, Toyoda T, et al. An investigation of a CT noise reduction using a modified of wiener filtering-edge detection. J Phys Conf Series. 2019;1217:012022.10.1088/1742-6596/1217/1/012022
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  36. [36] Ohkubo M, Wada S, Matsumoto T, Nishizawa K. An effective method to verify line and point spread functions measured in computed tomography. Med Phys. 2006;33(8):2757-2764.10.1118/1.221416816964851
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
  37. [37] Hsieh J. Computed tomography: principles, design artifacts, and recent advances. Bellingham: SPIE; 2003.
    Search in Google ScholarBack to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/pjmpe-2019-0024 | Journal eISSN: 1898-0309 | Journal ISSN: 1425-4689
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 179 - 187
Submitted on: Mar 7, 2019
|
Accepted on: Jul 30, 2019
|
Published on: Aug 28, 2019
Published by: Polish Society of Medical Physics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
modulation transfer function (MTF),
spatial resolution,
simple phantom,
image quality,
CT scan
Related subjects:
Medicine,
Biomedical engineering,
Physics,
Technical and applied physics,
Medical physics

© 2019 Choirul Anam, Toshioh Fujibuchi, Freddy Haryanto, Wahyu Setia Budi, Heri Sutanto, Kusworo Adi, Zaenul Muhlisin, Geoff Dougherty, published by Polish Society of Medical Physics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 25 (2019): Issue 3 (September 2019)Next article