% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Waltrich:136931,
author = {N. Waltrich$^*$ and S. Sawall$^*$ and J. Maier$^*$ and J.
Kuntz$^*$ and K. Stannigel and K. Lindenberg and M.
Kachelriess$^*$},
title = {{E}ffect of detruncation on the accuracy of {M}onte
{C}arlo-based scatter estimation in truncated {CBCT}.},
journal = {Medical physics},
volume = {45},
number = {8},
issn = {0094-2405},
address = {New York, NY},
reportid = {DKFZ-2018-01368},
pages = {3574 - 3590},
year = {2018},
abstract = {The purpose of this study is to investigate the necessity
of detruncation for scatter estimation of truncated
cone-beam CT (CBCT) data and to evaluate different
detruncation algorithms. Scattered radiation results in some
of the most severe artifacts in CT and depends strongly on
the size and the shape of the scanned object. Especially in
CBCT systems the large cone-angle and the small
detector-to-isocenter distance lead to a large amount of
scatter detected, resulting in cupping artifacts, streak
artifacts, and inaccurate CT-values. If a small field of
measurement (FOM) is used, as it is often the case in CBCT
systems, data are truncated in longitudinal and lateral
direction. Since only truncated data are available as input
for the scatter estimation, the already challenging
correction of scatter artifacts becomes even more
difficult.The following detruncation methods are compared
and evaluated with respect to scatter estimation: constant
detruncation, cosine detruncation, adaptive detruncation,
and prior-based detruncation using anatomical data from a
similar phantom or patient, also compared to the case where
no detruncation was performed. Each of the resulting,
detruncated reconstructions serve as input volume for a
Monte Carlo (MC) scatter estimation and subsequent scatter
correction. An evaluation is performed on a head simulation,
measurements of a head phantom and a patient using a dental
CBCT geometry with a FOM diameter of 11 cm. Additionally, a
thorax phantom is measured to assess performance in a C-Arm
geometry with a FOM of up to 20 cm.If scatter estimation is
based on simple detruncation algorithms like a constant or a
cosine detruncation scatter is estimated inaccurately,
resulting in incorrect CT-values as well as streak artifacts
in the corrected volume. For the dental CBCT phantom
measurement CT-values for soft tissue were corrected from
-204 HU (no scatter correction) to -87 HU (no
detruncation), -218 HU (constant detruncation), -141 HU
(cosine detruncation), -91 HU (adaptive detruncation),
-34 HU (prior-based detruncation using a different prior)
and -24 HU (prior-based detruncation using the identical
prior) for a reference value of -26 HU measured in slit
scan mode. In all cases the prior-based detruncation results
in the best scatter correction, followed by the adaptive
detruncation, as these algorithms provide a rather accurate
model of high-density structures outside the FOM, compared
to a simple constant or a cosine detruncation.Our
contribution is twofold: first we give a comprehensive
comparison of various detruncation methods for the purpose
of scatter estimation. We find that the choice of the
detruncation method has a significant influence on the
quality of MC-based scatter correction. Simple or no
detruncation is often insufficient for artifact removal and
results in inaccurate CT-values. On the contrary,
prior-based detruncation can achieve a high CT-value
accuracy and nearly artifact-free volumes from truncated
CBCT data when combined with other state-of-the-art artifact
corrections. Secondly, we show that prior-based detruncation
is effective even with data from a different patient or
phantom. The fact that data completion does not require data
from the same patient dramatically increases the
applicability and usability of this scatter estimation.},
cin = {E020 / E025},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-He78)E020-20160331 / I:(DE-He78)E025-20160331},
pnm = {315 - Imaging and radiooncology (POF3-315)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-315},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:29888791},
doi = {10.1002/mp.13041},
url = {https://inrepo02.dkfz.de/record/136931},
}