The piecewise-linear dynamic attenuator reduces the impact of count rate loss with photon-counting detectors
Physics in Medicine and Biology, ISSN: 1361-6560, Vol: 59, Issue: 11, Page: 2829-2847
2014
- 13Citations
- 13Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations13
- Citation Indexes13
- 13
- CrossRef8
- Captures13
- Readers13
- 13
Article Description
Photon counting x-ray detectors (PCXDs) offer several advantages compared to standard energy-integrating x-ray detectors, but also face significant challenges. One key challenge is the high count rates required in CT. At high count rates, PCXDs exhibit count rate loss and show reduced detective quantum efficiency in signal-rich (or high flux) measurements. In order to reduce count rate requirements, a dynamic beam-shaping filter can be used to redistribute flux incident on the patient. We study the piecewise-linear attenuator in conjunction with PCXDs without energy discrimination capabilities. We examined three detector models: the classic nonparalyzable and paralyzable detector models, and a 'hybrid' detector model which is a weighted average of the two which approximates an existing, real detector (Taguchi et al 2011 Med. Phys. 38 1089-102 ). We derive analytic expressions for the variance of the CT measurements for these detectors. These expressions are used with raw data estimated from DICOM image files of an abdomen and a thorax to estimate variance in reconstructed images for both the dynamic attenuator and a static beam-shaping ('bowtie') filter. By redistributing flux, the dynamic attenuator reduces dose by 40% without increasing peak variance for the ideal detector. For non-ideal PCXDs, the impact of count rate loss is also reduced. The nonparalyzable detector shows little impact from count rate loss, but with the paralyzable model, count rate loss leads to noise streaks that can be controlled with the dynamic attenuator. With the hybrid model, the characteristic count rates required before noise streaks dominate the reconstruction are reduced by a factor of 2 to 3. We conclude that the piecewise-linear attenuator can reduce the count rate requirements of the PCXD in addition to improving dose efficiency. The magnitude of this reduction depends on the detector, with paralyzable detectors showing much greater benefit than nonparalyzable detectors. © 2014 Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84900479743&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/59/11/2829; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24819415; https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9155/59/11/2829; https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/59/11/2829; https://validate.perfdrive.com/9730847aceed30627ebd520e46ee70b2/?ssa=8c8f9d9d-49bb-4537-b70b-b0f2a05b12dd&ssb=97622291693&ssc=https%3A%2F%2Fiopscience.iop.org%2Farticle%2F10.1088%2F0031-9155%2F59%2F11%2F2829&ssi=76547186-cnvj-4f6b-88c6-209e8f3947ba&ssk=botmanager_support@radware.com&ssm=12735026327719516129286149516968051&ssn=dbe57a419d5e34c96e7f8ae052e20eb7715611e4fc9b-fb87-4f4d-95de03&sso=457f5121-2d7afa72fb70bfab195b326e58e1abf97bf289916a50b3a3&ssp=53351327591727282411172742165506178&ssq=26190987183511677788089217921740470130179&ssr=NTIuMy4yMTcuMjU0&sst=com.plumanalytics&ssu=&ssv=&ssw=&ssx=eyJfX3V6bWYiOiI3ZjYwMDA3ZjU2ZDllYi00NDg4LTQyYmYtYjIyMS0wOWNmOTJkYjU2MmQxNzI3Mjg5MjE3MzMwMTgyNjE4MjMxLWQ1MGI1ZDQ1MGFjZGM0YjExMjkyOCIsInJkIjoiaW9wLm9yZyIsInV6bXgiOiI3ZjkwMDA1NWY4OThjZi1hZmU5LTRhOGMtYjFmMS1lYWY4MTcxNDU3MzczLTE3MjcyODkyMTczMzAxODI2MTgyMzEtMzllNTMyMWNiYjA2YzhiNzEyOTI4In0=
IOP Publishing
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know