Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Computational and Mathematical Methods in Medicine
Volume 2015, Article ID 906452, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/906452
Research Article

Few-View Prereconstruction Guided Tube Current Modulation Strategy Based on the Signal-to-Noise Ratio of the Sinogram

1Department of Engineering Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
2Key Laboratory of Particle & Radiation Imaging, Tsinghua University, Ministry of Education, Beijing 100084, China

Received 23 September 2014; Revised 27 December 2014; Accepted 28 December 2014

Academic Editor: Yi Gao

Copyright © 2015 Ming Chang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. D. J. Brenner and E. J. Hall, “Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure,” The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 357, no. 22, pp. 2277–2284, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. C. Zacharias, A. M. Alessio, R. K. Otto et al., “Pediatric CT: strategies to lower radiation dose,” The American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 200, no. 5, pp. 950–956, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. L. Yu, X. Liu, S. Leng et al., “Radiation dose reduction in computed tomography: techniques and future perspective,” Imaging in Medicine, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 65–84, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  4. M. K. Kalra, M. M. Maher, T. L. Toth et al., “Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT,” Radiology, vol. 233, no. 3, pp. 649–657, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. C. H. McCollough, M. R. Bruesewitz, and J. M. Kofler Jr., “CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options,” Radiographics, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 503–512, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. A. Gervaise, P. Naulet, F. Beuret et al., “Low-dose CT with automatic tube current modulation, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and low tube voltage for the diagnosis of renal colic: impact of body mass index,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 202, no. 3, pp. 553–560, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. M. Sderberg and M. Gunnarsson, “Automatic exposure control in computed tomography an evaluation of systems from different manufacturers,” Acta Radiologica, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 625–634, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. N. Althén, “Automatic tube-current modulation in CT—a comparison between different solutions,” Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol. 114, no. 1–3, pp. 308–312, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. K. M. Kanal, B. K. Stewart, O. Kolokythas, and W. P. Shuman, “Impact of operator-selected image noise index and reconstruction slice thickness on patient radiation dose in 64-MDCT,” American Journal of Roentgenology, vol. 189, no. 1, pp. 219–225, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. S. Namasivayam, M. K. Kalra, K. M. Pottala, S. M. Waldrop, and P. A. Hudgins, “Optimization of Z-axis automatic exposure control for multidetector row CT evaluation of neck and comparison with fixed tube current technique for image quality and radiation dose,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 2221–2225, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. J. H. Chen, E. H. Jin, W. He, and L. Q. Zhao, “Combining automatic tube current modulation with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for low-dose chest CT screening,” PLoS ONE, vol. 9, no. 4, Article ID e92414, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. H. Greess, A. Nömayr, H. Wolf et al., “Dose reduction in CT examination of children by an attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current (CARE Dose),” European Radiology, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 1571–1576, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. M. Ibrahim, H. Parmar, E. Christodoulou, and S. Mukherji, “Raise the bar and lower the dose: current and future strategies for radiation dose reduction in head and neck imaging,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 619–624, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. J. Ma, Z. Liang, Y. Fan et al., “Variance analysis of x-ray CT sinograms in the presence of electronic noise background,” Medical Physics, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 4051–4065, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. E. Y. Sidky, C.-M. Kao, and X. H. Pan, “Accurate image reconstruction from few-views and limited-angle data in divergent-beam CT,” Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 119–139, 2006. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. L. Li, Z. Chen, G. Wang, J. Chu, and H. Gao, “A tensor PRISM algorithm for multi-energy CT reconstruction and comparative studies,” Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 147–163, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. M. Chang, L. Li, Z. Chen, Y. Xiao, L. Zhang, and G. Wang, “A few-view reweighted sparsity hunting (FRESH) method for CT image reconstruction,” Journal of X-Ray Science and Technology, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 161–176, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. T. Niu and L. Zhu, “Accelerated barrier optimization compressed sensing (ABOCS) reconstruction for cone-beam CT: phantom studies,” Medical Physics, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 4588–4598, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. L. Shen and Y. Xing, “An edge-preserving total variation denoising method for DECT image,” in Proceedings of the Nuclear Science Symposium and Medical Imaging Conference (NSS/MIC '13), pp. 1–4, Seoul, South Korea, October–Novembe 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar