Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38923526›Full record

ArticleMedical physics2024

Development and validation of a noise insertion algorithm for photon-counting-detector CT.

Timothy Winfree, Cynthia McCollough, Lifeng Yu

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Medical physics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Patient-specific Channelized Hotelling observer to estimate lesion detectability in CT.Proceedings of SPIE--the International Society for Optical Engineering · 2025
    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

3 authors.

Timothy WinfreeDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Cynthia McColloughDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.
Lifeng YuDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

Trade-offs in human observer performance, image quality metrics, and patient doseR01EB017095 · NIBIB · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Hao Gong, Cynthia H McCollough · 2012 to 2026
$7.0M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB017095NIH HHS R01 EB017095
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInserting noise into existing patient projection data to simulate lower-radiation-dose exams has been frequently used in traditional energy-integrating-detector (EID)-CT to optimize radiation dose in clinical protocols and to generate paired images for training deep-learning-based reconstruction and noise reduction methods. Recent introduction of photon counting detector CT (PCD-CT) also requires such a method to accomplish these tasks. However, clinical PCD-CT scanners often restrict the users access to the raw count data, exporting only the preprocessed, log-normalized sinogram. Therefore, it remains a challenge to employ projection domain noise insertion algorithms on PCD-CT. PURPOSE: To develop and validate a projection domain noise insertion algorithm for PCD-CT that does not require access to the raw count data. MATERIALS AND

methodsA projection-domain noise model developed originally for EID-CT was adapted for PCD-CT. This model requires, as input, a map of the incident number of photons at each detector pixel when no object is in the beam. To obtain the map of incident number of photons, air scans were acquired on a PCD-CT scanner, then the noise equivalent photon number (NEPN) was calculated from the variance in the log normalized projection data of each scan. Additional air scans were acquired at various mA settings to investigate the impact of pulse pileup on the linearity of NEPN measurement. To validate the noise insertion algorithm, Noise Power Spectra (NPS) were generated from a 30 cm water tank scan and used to compare the noise texture and noise level of measured and simulated half dose and quarter dose images. An anthropomorphic thorax phantom was scanned with automatic exposure control, and noise levels at different slice locations were compared between simulated and measured half dose and quarter dose images. Spectral correlation between energy thresholds T1 and T2, and energy bins, B1 and B2, was compared between simulated and measured data across a wide range of tube current. Additionally, noise insertion was performed on a clinical patient case for qualitative assessment.

resultsThe NPS generated from simulated low dose water tank images showed similar shape and amplitude to that generated from the measured low dose images, differing by a maximum of 5.0% for half dose (HD) T1 images, 6.3% for HD T2 images, 4.1% for quarter dose (QD) T1 images, and 6.1% for QD T2 images. Noise versus slice measurements of the lung phantom showed comparable results between measured and simulated low dose images, with root mean square percent errors of 5.9%, 5.4%, 5.0%, and 4.6% for QD T1, HD T1, QD T2, and HD T2, respectively. NEPN measurements in air were linear up until 112 mA, after which pulse pileup effects significantly distort the air scan NEPN profile. Spectral correlation between T1 and T2 in simulation agreed well with that in the measured data in typical dose ranges.

conclusionsA projection-domain noise insertion algorithm was developed and validated for PCD-CT to synthesize low-dose images from existing scans. It can be used for optimizing scanning protocols and generating paired images for training deep-learning-based methods.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsPhotonsSignal-To-Noise RatioTomography, X-Ray ComputedHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedPhantoms, Imagingcomputed tomographyimage qualityphoton counting CTprotocol optimizationradiation dose reduction

Identifiers

PMID38923526
PMCPMC11489017

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.