An assessment of image distortion and CT number accuracy within a wide-bore CT extended field of view.

Citation data:

Australasian physical & engineering sciences in medicine, ISSN: 1879-5447, Vol: 38, Issue: 2, Page: 255-61

Publication Year:
2015
Usage 633
Downloads 613
Abstract Views 14
Link-outs 5
Full Text Views 1
Captures 17
Readers 16
Exports-Saves 1
Citations 1
Citation Indexes 1
Repository URL:
http://ro.uow.edu.au/eispapers/4443
PMID:
26048719
DOI:
10.1007/s13246-015-0353-6
Author(s):
Beeksma, Bradley; Truant, D; Holloway, Lois C; Arumugam, Sankar
Publisher(s):
Springer Nature
Tags:
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology; Engineering; Medicine; extended; field; view; image; assessment; distortion; ct; number; accuracy; within; wide; bore; Science and Technology Studies
article description
Although wide bore computed tomography (CT) scanners provide increased space for patients, the scan field of view (sFOV) remains considerably smaller than the bore size. Consequently, patient anatomy which spans beyond the sFOV is truncated and the information is lost. As a solution, some manufacturers provide the capacity to reconstruct CT images from a partial dataset at an extended field of view (eFOV). To assess spatial distortion within this eFOV three phantoms were considered a 30 × 30 × 20 cm(3) slab of solid water, the Gammex electron density CT phantom and a female anthropomorphic phantom. For each phantom, scans were taken centrally within the sFOV as a reference image and with the phantom edge extended at 1 cm intervals from 0 to 5 cm beyond the sFOV into the eFOV. To assess CT number accuracy various tissue equivalent materials were scanned in the eFOV and resulting CT numbers were compared to inserts scanned within the sFOV. For all phantom geometries, objects within the eFOV were geometrically overestimated with elongation of phantom shapes into the eFOV. The percentage increase in size ranged from 0.22 to 15.94 % over all phantoms considered. The difference between eFOV and sFOV CT numbers was dependent upon insert density. The eFOV underestimated CT numbers in the range of -127 to -230 HU for soft tissue densities and -278 to -640 for bone densities. This trend reversed for low tissue densities with the CT numbers in the eFOV being overestimated by 100-130 HU for lung equivalent inserts. Initial correlation between eFOV and sFOV CT numbers was seen and a correction function was successfully applied to better estimate the CT number representative of that seen within the sFOV.