Premium
Comparison of breathing gated CT images generated using a 5DCT technique and a commercial clinical protocol in a porcine model
Author(s) -
O'Connell Dylan P.,
Thomas David H.,
Dou Tai H.,
Lamb James M.,
Feingold Franklin,
Low Daniel A.,
Fuld Matthew K.,
Sieren Jered P.,
Sloan Chelsea M.,
Shirk Melissa A.,
Hoffman Eric A.,
Hofmann Christian
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4922201
Subject(s) - breathing , nuclear medicine , image registration , standard deviation , landmark , biomedical engineering , image noise , medicine , mathematics , computer science , artificial intelligence , anatomy , image (mathematics) , statistics
Purpose: To demonstrate that a “5DCT” technique which utilizes fast helical acquisition yields the same respiratory‐gated images as a commercial technique for regular, mechanically produced breathing cycles. Methods: Respiratory‐gated images of an anesthetized, mechanically ventilated pig were generated using a Siemens low‐pitch helical protocol and 5DCT for a range of breathing rates and amplitudes and with standard and low dose imaging protocols. 5DCT reconstructions were independently evaluated by measuring the distances between tissue positions predicted by a 5D motion model and those measured using deformable registration, as well by reconstructing the originally acquired scans. Discrepancies between the 5DCT and commercial reconstructions were measured using landmark correspondences. Results: The mean distance between model predicted tissue positions and deformably registered tissue positions over the nine datasets was 0.65 ± 0.28 mm. Reconstructions of the original scans were on average accurate to 0.78 ± 0.57 mm. Mean landmark displacement between the commercial and 5DCT images was 1.76 ± 1.25 mm while the maximum lung tissue motion over the breathing cycle had a mean value of 27.2 ± 4.6 mm. An image composed of the average of 30 deformably registered images acquired with a low dose protocol had 6 HU image noise (single standard deviation) in the heart versus 31 HU for the commercial images. Conclusions: An end to end evaluation of the 5DCT technique was conducted through landmark based comparison to breathing gated images acquired with a commercial protocol under highly regular ventilation. The techniques were found to agree to within 2 mm for most respiratory phases and most points in the lung.