Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT

How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data?

Kyoungho Lee, Helen Hong, Ji H. Yang, Kyung Won Lee, Hak Jong Lee, Sang H. Kim, Dong K. Jeong

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.

Original languageEnglish
Article number47
Pages (from-to)436-441
Number of pages6
JournalProgress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE
Volume5749
DOIs
StatePublished - 19 Sep 2005
EventMedical Imaging 2005 - Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment - San Diego, CA, United States
Duration: 15 Feb 200517 Feb 2005

Fingerprint

Computer-Assisted Image Processing
Image reconstruction
slabs
projection
Mean square error
Image quality
Explosions
Productivity
ROC Curve
discrimination
image reconstruction
Datasets
root-mean-square errors
productivity
Radiologists
explosions
substitutes

Keywords

  • Computed tomography
  • Image quality
  • Multiplanar reformation
  • Summation

Cite this

@article{c4136ba3e20d4f69a15dd97296736b9b,
title = "Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT: How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data?",
abstract = "Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20{\%} overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50{\%} overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95{\%} CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95{\%} CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95{\%} CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95{\%} CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.",
keywords = "Computed tomography, Image quality, Multiplanar reformation, Summation",
author = "Kyoungho Lee and Helen Hong and Yang, {Ji H.} and Lee, {Kyung Won} and Lee, {Hak Jong} and Kim, {Sang H.} and Jeong, {Dong K.}",
year = "2005",
month = "9",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1117/12.593551",
language = "English",
volume = "5749",
pages = "436--441",
journal = "Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE",
issn = "1605-7422",
publisher = "SPIE",

}

Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT : How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data? / Lee, Kyoungho; Hong, Helen; Yang, Ji H.; Lee, Kyung Won; Lee, Hak Jong; Kim, Sang H.; Jeong, Dong K.

In: Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE, Vol. 5749, 47, 19.09.2005, p. 436-441.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Summation and axial slab reformation of thin-section abdominal CT

T2 - How much are they different from primary reconstruction of a raw projection data?

AU - Lee, Kyoungho

AU - Hong, Helen

AU - Yang, Ji H.

AU - Lee, Kyung Won

AU - Lee, Hak Jong

AU - Kim, Sang H.

AU - Jeong, Dong K.

PY - 2005/9/19

Y1 - 2005/9/19

N2 - Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.

AB - Summation and axial slab reformation (ASR) of thin-section CT dataset are increasingly used to increase productivity against data explosion and to increase the image quality. We hypothesized that the summation or ASR can substitute primary reconstruction (PR) directly from a raw projection data. PR datasets (5-mm section thickness, 20% overlap) were reconstructed in 150 abdominal studies. Summation and ASR datasets of the same image positions and nominal section thickness were calculated from thin-section reconstruction images (2-mm section thickness, 50% overlap). Median root-mean-square error between PR and summation (9.55: 95% CI: 9.51, 9.59) was significantly greater than that between PR and ASR (7.12: 95% CI: 7.08, 7.17) (p < 0.0001). Three radiologists independently analyzed 2,000 pairs of PR and test images (PR [as control], summation, or ASR) to determine if summation or ASR is distinguished from PR. Multireader-multicase ROC analysis showed that Az value was 0.597 (95% CI: 0.552, 0.642) for the discrimination between PR and summation, and 0.574 (95% CI: 0.529, 0.619) for the discrimination between PR and ASR. The difference between these two Az values were not significant (p = 0.41). Radiologists can distinguish between the PR image and the summation or ASR image in abdominal studies, although this discrimination performance is slightly better than would be expected from random guessing. Image fidelity of ASR is higher than that of summation, if PR is regarded as the reference standard.

KW - Computed tomography

KW - Image quality

KW - Multiplanar reformation

KW - Summation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24644443802&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1117/12.593551

DO - 10.1117/12.593551

M3 - Conference article

VL - 5749

SP - 436

EP - 441

JO - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE

JF - Progress in Biomedical Optics and Imaging - Proceedings of SPIE

SN - 1605-7422

M1 - 47

ER -