ArticleOral radiology2018
Impact of statistical reconstruction and compressed sensing algorithms on projection data elimination during X-ray CT image reconstruction.
Article in Oral radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the effect of incomplete, or total elimination of, projection data on computed tomography (CT) images subjected to statistical reconstruction and/or compressed sensing algorithms.
methodsMultidetector row CT images were used. The algebraic reconstruction technique (ART) and the maximum likelihood-expectation maximization (ML-EM) method were compared with filtered back-projection (FBP). Effects on reconstructed images were studied when the projection data of 360° (360 projections) were decreased to 180 or 90 projections by reducing the collection angle or thinning the image data. The total variation (TV) regularization method using compressed sensing was applied to images processed by the ART. Image noise was subjectively evaluated using the root-mean-square error and signal-to-noise ratio.
resultsWhen projection data were reduced by one-half or three-quarters, ART and ML-EM produced better image quality than FBP. Both ART and ML-EM resulted in high quality at a spread of 90 projections over 180° rotation. Computational loading was high for statistical reconstruction, but not for ML-EM, compared with the ART. TV regularization made it possible to use only 36 projections while still achieving acceptable image quality.
conclusionsIncomplete projection data-accomplished by reducing the angle to collect image data or thinning the projection data without reducing the angle of rotation over which it is collected-made it possible to reduce the radiation dose while retaining image quality with statistical reconstruction algorithms and/or compressed sensing. Despite heavier computational calculation loading, these methods should be considered for reducing radiation doses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30484036What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.