Reduction of cone-beam CT artifacts in a robotic CBCT device using saddle trajectories with integrated infrared tracking.

CBCT cone beam artifact data insufficiency infrared tracking robotic saddle trajectories

Journal

Medical physics
ISSN: 2473-4209
Titre abrégé: Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0425746

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
15 Jan 2024
Historique:
revised: 08 12 2023
received: 05 09 2023
accepted: 27 12 2023
medline: 15 1 2024
pubmed: 15 1 2024
entrez: 15 1 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used in many medical fields. However, conventional CBCT circular scans suffer from cone beam (CB) artifacts that limit the quality and reliability of the reconstructed images due to incomplete data. Saddle trajectories in theory might be able to improve the CBCT image quality by providing a larger region with complete data. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and performance of saddle trajectory CBCT scans and compared them to circular trajectory scans. We performed circular and saddle trajectory scans using a novel robotic CBCT scanner (Mobile ImagingRing (IRm); medPhoton, Salzburg, Austria). For the saddle trajectory, the gantry executed yaw motion up to When using the saddle trajectory, the region without CB artifacts was increased from 43 to 190 mm in the SI direction compared to the circular trajectory. This region coincided with low values for We achieved saddle trajectory CBCT scans with a novel CBCT system combined with IR tracking. The results show that the saddle trajectory provides a larger region with reliable reconstruction compared to the circular trajectory. The proposed method can be used to evaluate other non-circular trajectories.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used in many medical fields. However, conventional CBCT circular scans suffer from cone beam (CB) artifacts that limit the quality and reliability of the reconstructed images due to incomplete data.
PURPOSE OBJECTIVE
Saddle trajectories in theory might be able to improve the CBCT image quality by providing a larger region with complete data. Therefore, we investigated the feasibility and performance of saddle trajectory CBCT scans and compared them to circular trajectory scans.
METHODS METHODS
We performed circular and saddle trajectory scans using a novel robotic CBCT scanner (Mobile ImagingRing (IRm); medPhoton, Salzburg, Austria). For the saddle trajectory, the gantry executed yaw motion up to
RESULTS RESULTS
When using the saddle trajectory, the region without CB artifacts was increased from 43 to 190 mm in the SI direction compared to the circular trajectory. This region coincided with low values for
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
We achieved saddle trajectory CBCT scans with a novel CBCT system combined with IR tracking. The results show that the saddle trajectory provides a larger region with reliable reconstruction compared to the circular trajectory. The proposed method can be used to evaluate other non-circular trajectories.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38224324
doi: 10.1002/mp.16943
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : INST 86/2120-1 FUGG

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Authors. Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Références

Baba R, Ueda K, Okabe M. Using a flat-panel detector in high resolution cone beam CT for dental imaging. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2004;33:285-290.
Kapila SD, Nervina JM. CBCT in orthodontics: assessment of treatment outcomes and indications for its use. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2015;44:20140282.
Jaffray DA, Drake DG, Moreau M, Martinez AA, Wong JW. A radiographic and tomographic imaging system integrated into a medical linear accelerator for localization of bone and soft-tissue targets. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;45:773-789.
Barney BM, Lee RJ, Handrahan D, Welsh KT, Cook JT, Sause WT. Image-Guided Radiotherapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer comparing kV imaging of fiducial markers with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;80:301-305.
Dzierma Y, Beyhs M, Palm J, et al. Set-up errors and planning margins in planar and CBCT image-guided radiotherapy using three different imaging systems: a clinical study for prostate and head-and-neck cancer. Physica Med. 2015;31:1055-1059.
Rafferty MA, Siewerdsen JH, Chan Y, et al. Investigation of C-Arm Cone-Beam CT-Guided Surgery of the Frontal Recess:. Laryngoscope. 2005;115:2138-2143.
Siewerdsen JH. Cone-beam CT with a flat-panel detector: from image science to image-guided surgery. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res, Sect A. 2011;648:S241-S250.
Karius A, Strnad V, Lotter M, Kreppner S, Bert C. First clinical experience with a novel, mobile cone-beam CT system for treatment quality assurance in brachytherapy. Strahlenther Onkol. 2022;198:573-581.
Tuy HK. An inversion formula for cone-beam reconstruction. SIAM J Appl Math. 1983;43:546-552.
Finch DV. Cone beam reconstruction with sources on a curve. SIAM J Appl Math. 1985;45:665-673.
van Straten M, Venema H, Majoie C, Freling N, Grimbergen C, den Heeten G. Image quality of multisection CT of the brain: thickly collimated sequential scanning versus thinly collimated spiral scanning with image combining. Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28:421-427.
Nikupaavo U, Kaasalainen T, Reijonen V, Ahonen S-M, Kortesniemi M. Lens dose in routine head CT: comparison of different optimization methods with anthropomorphic phantoms. Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204:117-123.
Yamagami T, Kato T, Iida S, Hirota T, Nishimura T. Percutaneous needle biopsy for small lung nodules beneath the rib under CT scan fluoroscopic guidance with Gantry Tilt. Chest. 2004;126:744-747.
Tersol A, Wu P, Clackdoyle R, Boone JM, Siewerdsen JH. Sampling effects for emerging cone-beam CT systems and scan trajectories: from Tuy's condition to system design and routine image quality tests. In: Zhao W, Yu L, eds. Medical Imaging 2022: Physics of Medical Imaging. SPIE; 2022:55.
Gang GJ, Siewerdsen JH, Stayman JW. Non-circular CT orbit design for elimination of metal artifacts. In: Bosmans H, Chen G-H, eds. Medical Imaging 2020: Physics of Medical Imaging. SPIE; 2020:79.
Stayman JW, Capostagno S, Gang GJ, Siewerdsen JH. Task-driven source-detector trajectories in cone-beam computed tomography: I. Theory and methods. J Med Imaging. 2019;6:1.
Wu P, Sheth N, Sisniega A, et al. C-arm orbits for metal artifact avoidance (MAA) in cone-beam CT. Phys Med Biol. 2020;65:165012.
Hosoo H, Ito Y, Marushima A, et al. Image quality improvements for brain soft tissue in neuro-endovascular treatments: a novel dual-axis “butterfly” trajectory for optimized cone-beam CT. Eur J Radiol. 2023;160:110713.
Ma YQ, Gang GJ, Ehtiati T, et al. Non-circular CBCT Orbit design and realization on a clinical robotic C-arm for metal artifact reduction. In: Linte CA, Siewerdsen JH, eds. Medical Imaging 2022: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, Modeling. SPIE; 2022:8.
Reynolds T, Ma Y, Wang T, et al. Revealing pelvic structures in the presence of metal hip prothesis via non-circular CBCT orbits. Proc SPIE-Int Soc Opt Eng. 2023;12466:124660Y.
Katsevich A. Theoretically exact filtered backprojection-type inversion algorithm for spiral CT. SIAM J Appl Math. 2002;62:2012-2026.
Noo F, Pack J, Heuscher D. Exact helical reconstruction using native cone-beam geometries. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48:3787-3818.
Yu H, Wang G. Studies on artifacts of the Katsevich algorithm for spiral cone-beam CT. In: U. Bonse, eds. Developments in X-Ray Tomography IV. SPIE; 2004:540.
Katsevich A. Image reconstruction for the circle and line trajectory. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:5059-5072.
Katsevich A. Image reconstruction for the circle-and-arc trajectory. Phys Med Biol. 2005;50:2249-2265.
Pack JD, Noo F, Kudo H. Investigation of saddle trajectories for cardiac CT imaging in cone-beam geometry. Phys Med Biol. 2004;49:2317-2336.
Clackdoyle R, Noo F. Quantification of Tomographic Incompleteness in Cone-Beam Reconstruction. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2020;4:63-80.
Sun T, Clackdoyle R, Kim J-H, Fulton R, Nuyts J. Estimation of Local Data-Insufficiency in Motion-Corrected Helical CT. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci. 2017;1:346-357.
Keuschnigg P, Kellner D, Fritscher K, et al. Nine-degrees-of-freedom flexmap for a cone-beam computed tomography imaging device with independently movable source and detector. Med Phys. 2017;44:132-142.
Zechner A, Stock M, Kellner D, et al. Development and first use of a novel cylindrical ball bearing phantom for 9-DOF geometric calibrations of flat panel imaging devices used in image-guided ion beam therapy. Phys Med Biol. 2016;61:N592.
Messner IM, Keuschnigg P, Stöllinger B, et al. Investigating focal spot position drift in a mobile imaging system equipped with a monobloc-based x-ray generator. Med Phys. 2023;1-12.
Rit S, Oliva MV, Brousmiche S, Labarbe R, Sarrut D, Sharp GC. The Reconstruction Toolkit (RTK), an open-source cone-beam CT reconstruction toolkit based on the Insight Toolkit (ITK). J Phys Conf Ser. 2014;489:012079.
Götz S, Dickmann J, Rit S, et al. Evaluation of the impact of a scanner prototype on proton CT and helium CT image quality and dose efficiency with Monte Carlo simulation. Phys Med Biol. 2022;67:055003.
Chen B, Ramirez Giraldo JC, Solomon J, Samei E. Evaluating iterative reconstruction performance in computed tomography. Med Phys. 2014;41:121913.
Gindrier N. Reconstruction cone-beam à partir de projections avec troncations transverses. PhD thesis, 2022. Thèse de doctorat dirigée par Desbat, Laurent et Clackdoyle, Rolf Mathématiques appliquées Université Grenoble Alpes 2022.
Belotti G, Fattori G, Baroni G, Rit S. Extension of the cone-beam CT field-of-view using two complementary short scans. Med Phys. 2023;1-14.
Karius A, Szkitsak J, Strnad V, Fietkau R, Bert C. Cone-beam CT imaging with laterally enlarged field of view based on independently movable source and detector. Med Phys. 2023;50:5135-5149.

Auteurs

Chengtao Wei (C)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Garching, Germany.

Johanna Albrecht (J)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Garching, Germany.

Simon Rit (S)

Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1294, F-69373, Lyon, France.

Matthieu Laurendeau (M)

Univ Lyon, INSA-Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, UJM-Saint Etienne, CNRS, Inserm, CREATIS UMR 5220, U1294, F-69373, Lyon, France.
Thales AVS, Moirans, France.

Adrian Thummerer (A)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Stefanie Corradini (S)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Claus Belka (C)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.
German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), Partner Site Munich, Munich, Germany.
German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), partner site Munich, a partnership between DKFZ and LMU University Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.

Philipp Steininger (P)

Research & Development, medPhoton GmbH, Salzburg, Austria.

Felix Ginzinger (F)

Research & Development, medPhoton GmbH, Salzburg, Austria.

Christopher Kurz (C)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Marco Riboldi (M)

Department of Medical Physics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Garching, Germany.

Guillaume Landry (G)

Department of Radiation Oncology, LMU University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Classifications MeSH