ArticleHeliyon2024
Quantitative multi-energy micro-CT: A simulation and phantom study for simultaneous imaging of four different contrast materials using an energy integrating detector.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- No Reproducibility, No Progress: Rethinking CT Benchmarking.Journal of imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging from the development of single-energy Computed Tomography (CT) and Dual-Energy Computed Tomography, Multi-Energy Computed Tomography (MECT) is a promising tool allowing advanced material and tissue decomposition and thereby enabling the use of multiple contrast materials in preclinical research. The scope of this work was to evaluate whether a usual preclinical micro-CT system is applicable for the decomposition of different materials using MECT together with a matrix-inversion method and how different changes of the measurement-environment affect the results. A matrix-inversion based algorithm to differentiate up to five materials (iodine, iron, barium, gadolinium, residual material) by applying four different acceleration voltages/energy levels was established. We carried out simulations using different ratios and concentrations (given in fractions of volume units, VU) of the four different materials (plus residual material) at different noise-levels for 30 keV, 40 keV, 50 keV, 60 keV, 80 keV and 100 keV (monochromatic). Our simulation results were then confirmed by using region of interest-based measurements in a phantom-study at corresponding acceleration voltages. Therefore, different mixtures of contrast materials were scanned using a micro-CT. Voxel wise evaluation of the phantom imaging data was conducted to confirm its usability for future imaging applications and to estimate the influence of varying noise-levels, scattering, artifacts and concentrations. The analysis of our simulations showed the smallest deviation of 0.01 (0.003-0.15) VU between given and calculated concentrations of the different contrast materials when using an energy-combination of 30 keV, 40 keV, 50 keV and 100 keV for MECT. Subsequent MECT phantom measurements, however, revealed a combination of acceleration voltages of 30 kV, 40 kV, 60 kV and 100 kV as most effective for performing material decomposition with a deviation of 0.28 (0-1.07) mg/ml. The feasibility of our voxelwise analyses using the proposed algorithm was then confirmed by the generation of phantom parameter-maps that matched the known contrast material concentrations. The results were mostly influenced by the noise-level and the concentrations used in the phantoms. MECT using a standard micro-CT combined with a matrix inversion method is feasible at four different imaging energies and allows the differentiation of mixtures of up to four contrast materials plus an additional residual material.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.