Translator Disclaimer
Paper
24 March 2016 Quantitative image quality evaluation for cardiac CT reconstructions
Author Affiliations +
Abstract
Maintaining image quality in the presence of motion is always desirable and challenging in clinical Cardiac CT imaging. Different image-reconstruction algorithms are available on current commercial CT systems that attempt to achieve this goal. It is widely accepted that image-quality assessment should be task-based and involve specific tasks, observers, and associated figures of merits. In this work, we developed an observer model that performed the task of estimating the percentage of plaque in a vessel from CT images. We compared task performance of Cardiac CT image data reconstructed using a conventional FBP reconstruction algorithm and the SnapShot Freeze (SSF) algorithm, each at default and optimal reconstruction cardiac phases. The purpose of this work is to design an approach for quantitative image-quality evaluation of temporal resolution for Cardiac CT systems. To simulate heart motion, a moving coronary type phantom synchronized with an ECG signal was used. Three different percentage plaques embedded in a 3 mm vessel phantom were imaged multiple times under motion free, 60 bpm, and 80 bpm heart rates. Static (motion free) images of this phantom were taken as reference images for image template generation. Independent ROIs from the 60 bpm and 80 bpm images were generated by vessel tracking. The observer performed estimation tasks using these ROIs. Ensemble mean square error (EMSE) was used as the figure of merit. Results suggest that the quality of SSF images is superior to the quality of FBP images in higher heart-rate scans.
© (2016) COPYRIGHT Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE). Downloading of the abstract is permitted for personal use only.
Hsin-Wu Tseng, Jiahua Fan, Matthew A. Kupinski, William Balhorn, and Darin R. Okerlund "Quantitative image quality evaluation for cardiac CT reconstructions", Proc. SPIE 9787, Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 978716 (24 March 2016); https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2208341
PROCEEDINGS
10 PAGES


SHARE
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back to Top