High-Definition CT Gemstone Spectral Imaging of the Brain: Initial Results of Selecting Optimal Monochromatic Image for Beam-Hardening Artifacts and Image Noise Reduction

Objective: The purpose of this study was to select the optimal monochromatic level for gemstone spectral imaging (GSI) to minimize both the image noise and beam-hardening artifacts (BHAs) in nonenhanced cranial computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods: One hundred subjects scanned with GSI mode on Discovery CT750HD were enrolled. Six sets of CT images were obtained from a single GSI acquisition: conventional 140 kilovolt (peak) (kV[p]) polychromatic images and 5 sets of monochromatic images (80, 75, 70, 65, and 60 kiloelectron volts [keV]). The background noise in the corona and the BHA in 4 different anatomic regions (medulla oblongata, cerebellar, pons, and the inferior part of frontal lobes) were measured and compared between the polychromatic and monochromatic images. Beam-hardening artifact is defined as the square root of the squared noise difference between the region of interest and background. Results: The background noise with the monochromatic sets reduced by −36%, −11%, 11%, 10%, and −14%, respectively, compared to the polychromatic image. For BHA, the reductions were 73%, 91%, 92%, and 80%; 53%, 75%, 65%, and 41.%; 27%, 59%, 44%, and 26%; 7%, 46%, 25%, and 20%; and −14%, 33%, 6%, and 19% for the 4 regions of interest. Both the 70 and 65 keV sets had positive background noise reduction (P = 0.285) and BHA reduction with 70 keV were statistically higher (P < 0.05). Conclusion: In the nonenhanced cranial CT with GSI, the optimal monochromatic level was determined at 70 keV to provide both image noise reduction (11%) and BHA reduction compared to the conventional polychromatic images.

[1]  C Ytterbergh,et al.  Artifacts in Computed Tomography of the Posterior Fossa: A Comparative Phantom Study , 1986, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[2]  H. Deininger,et al.  Cranial CT artifacts and gantry angulation. , 1991, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[3]  Jeffrey A. Fessler,et al.  Statistical image reconstruction for polyenergetic X-ray computed tomography , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  L. Yeoman,et al.  Gantry angulation in brain CT: dosage implications, effect on posterior fossa artifacts, and current international practice. , 1992, Radiology.

[5]  P. Joseph,et al.  A Method for Correcting Bone Induced Artifacts in Computed Tomography Scanners , 1978, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[6]  N J Pelc,et al.  Nonlinear partial volume artifacts in x-ray computed tomography. , 1980, Medical physics.

[7]  Xiaochuan Pan,et al.  Impact of polychromatic x-ray sources on helical, cone-beam computed tomography and dual-energy methods. , 2004, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  G T Herman,et al.  Demonstration of Beam Hardening Correction in Computed Tomography of the Head , 1979, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[9]  J. Ambrose,et al.  Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography): Part 2. Clinical application* , 1973 .

[10]  J. P. Stonestrom,et al.  A Framework for Spectral Artifact Corrections in X-Ray CT , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[11]  J. Ambrose,et al.  Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography). 2. Clinical application. , 1973, The British journal of radiology.

[12]  Christianne Leidecker,et al.  Dual-energy CT in patients suspected of having renal masses: can virtual nonenhanced images replace true nonenhanced images? , 2009, Radiology.

[13]  A. Macovski,et al.  Energy-selective reconstructions in X-ray computerised tomography , 1976, Physics in medicine and biology.

[14]  G. Herman Correction for beam hardening in computed tomography. , 1979, Physics in medicine and biology.