Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33080583›Full record

ArticlePhysics in medicine and biology2020

Cone beam CT multisource configurations: evaluating image quality, scatter, and dose using phantom imaging and Monte Carlo simulations.

Amy E Becker, Andrew M Hernandez, Paul R Schwoebel, John M Boone

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Physics in medicine and biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Flat-panel conebeam CT in the clinic: history and current state.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Amy E BeckerDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817, United States of America.
Andrew M HernandezDepartment of Radiology, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817, United States of America.
Paul R SchwoebelDepartment of Physics, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131, United States of America.
John M BooneDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of California Davis, Sacramento, CA 95817, United States of America.

Funding

A Prototype Stationary X-Ray Source Digital Breast Tomosynthesis SystemR01CA214515 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI SCHWOEBEL, PAUL R · 2017 to 2025
$3.1M
Breast CT: Final Steps to TranslationR01CA181081 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI BOONE, JOHN M · 2015 to 2019
$2.9M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA181081NCI NIH HHS R01 CA214515
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare various multisource configurations applied to cone beam CT (CBCT) using phantom imaging and Monte Carlo simulations. Image quality, scatter, and dose were evaluated in both overlapping (large cone angle) and collimated (small cone angle) configurations for CBCT. Four x-ray tube configurations were considered: traditional one source, three source overlapping, six source overlapping, and six source collimated. Image quality was evaluated on a prototype breast CT system using the following five phantoms: a Defrise phantom, a previously reported CBCT QA phantom (Corgi), a polyethylene cylinder, and two anthropomorphic phantoms (hand and knee). Scatter contamination and radiation dose were evaluated using Monte Carlo simulations of a voxelized polyethylene cylinder. The modulation of the Defrise phantom disks on average was 2.7X greater for the six source collimated configuration than the six source overlapping configuration. The data lost from cone beam artifact (spatial domain) and the null cone (frequency domain) in the overlapping configuration were completely recovered using the collimated configuration. The maximum scatter-to-primary ratio (SPR) for the overlapping configuration was 0.81 and the maximum SPR for the collimated configuration was 0.26. The average dose and maximum dose was 4X less in the collimated six source configuration when compared with the overlapping configurations. The maximum dose for the overlapping configurations (one, three & six) remained constant, but the average dose for the multisource (three & six source) overlapping configurations increased 25% when compared to the one source configuration. Use of a collimated multisource x-ray tube configuration was shown to provide significant improvements in image quality throughout the cone-beam geometry field-of-view, reduction in scatter contamination, and more efficient use of dose in comparison to both the traditional CBCT geometry with a single source and the overlapping multisource configurations.

Indexed as

Monte Carlo MethodPhantoms, ImagingQuality ControlArtifactsCone-Beam Computed TomographyHumansRadiation DosageScattering, RadiationTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID33080583
PMCPMC8561950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.