Adaptive noise correction of dual-energy computed tomography images

  • Rafael Simon Maia
  • Christian Jacob
  • Amy K. Hara
  • Alvin C. Silva
  • William Pavlicek
  • J. Ross Mitchell
Original Article
  • 183 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Noise reduction in material density images is a necessary preprocessing step for the correct interpretation of dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) images. In this paper we describe a new method based on a local adaptive processing to reduce noise in DECT images

Methods

An adaptive neighborhood Wiener (ANW) filter was implemented and customized to use local characteristics of material density images. The ANW filter employs a three-level wavelet approach, combined with the application of an anisotropic diffusion filter. Material density images and virtual monochromatic images are noise corrected with two resulting noise maps.

Results

The algorithm was applied and quantitatively evaluated in a set of 36 images. From that set of images, three are shown here, and nine more are shown in the online supplementary material. Processed images had higher signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) than the raw material density images. The average improvements in SNR and CNR for the material density images were 56.5 and 54.75 %, respectively.

Conclusion

We developed a new DECT noise reduction algorithm. We demonstrate throughout a series of quantitative analyses that the algorithm improves the quality of material density images and virtual monochromatic images.

Keywords

Material density Dual-energy computed tomography Noise reduction Adaptive Wiener filter 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Rafael Simon Maia, Christian Jacob, Amy K. Hara, Alvin C. Silva, William Pavlicek and J.Ross Mitchell declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

11548_2015_1297_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (32.3 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (pdf 33092 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Balda M, Heismann B, Hornegger J (2010) Value-based noise reduction for low-dose dual-energy computed tomography. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borsdorf A, Raupach R, Flohr T, Hornegger J (2008) Wavelet based noise reduction in CT-images using correlation analysis. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 27(12):1685–1703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grant KL, Flohr TG, Krauss B, Sedlmair M (2014) Assessment of an advanced image-based technique to calculate virtual monoenergetic computed tomographic images from a dual-energy examination to improve contrast-to-noise ratio in examinations using iodinated contrast media. Investig Radiol 49(9):586–592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hinshaw DA, Dobbins JT III (1995) Recent progress in noise reduction and scatter correction in dual-energy imaging. In: Van Metter RL, Beutel J (eds) Medical imaging. SPIE, Washington, pp 134–142Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kalender W, Klotz E, Kostaridou L (1988) An algorithm for noise suppression in dual energy CT material density images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 7(3):218–224CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lee JS (1980) Digital image enhancement and noise filtering by use of local statistics. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 2:165–168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li B, Li B, Luo J, Tang P, Mao J, Wu X (2013) Simultaneous reduction in noise and cross-contamination artifacts for dual-energy X-ray CT. BioMed Res Int 2013(6):1–8Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Macovski A, Nishimura DG, Doost-Hoseini A, Brody WR (1983) Measurement-dependent filtering: a novel approach to improved SNR. IEEE Trans Med imaging 2(3):122–127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maia RS, Jacob C, Hara AK, Silva AC, Pavlicek W, Ross MJ (2015) An algorithm for noise correction of dual-energy computed tomography material density images. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 10(1):87–100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Park KK, Oh CH, Akay M (2011) Image enhancement by spectral-error correction for dual-energy computed tomography. In: 2011 33rd annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society. IEEE, pp 8491–8494Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park KK, Pavlicek W, Boltz T, Paden R, Hara A, Akay M (2009) Image-based dual energy CT improvements using Gram–Schmidt method. In: Samei E, Hsieh J (eds) SPIE medical imaging. SPIE, Washington, pp 72583S–72583S-9Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Prewitt JM (1970) Object enhancement and extraction. chap. In: Lipkin BS, Rosenfeld A (eds) Picture processing and psychopictorics. Academic Press, New York, pp 75–149Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rangayyan RM, Ciuc M, Faghih F (1998) Adaptive-neighborhood filtering of images corrupted by signal-dependent noise. Appl Opt 37(20):4477–4487CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Silva AC, Lawder HJ, Hara A, Kujak J, Pavlicek W (2009) Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. Am J Roentgenol 194(1):191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wang Z, Bovik AC, Sheikh HR, Simoncelli EP (2004) Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Process 13(4):600–612CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Warp RJ, Dobbins JT (2003) Quantitative evaluation of noise reduction strategies in dual-energy imaging. Med Phys 30(2):190–198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wu X, Langan DA, Xu D, Benson TM et al (2009) Monochromatic CT image representation via fast switching dual kVp. Proc SPIE 7258:725845CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© CARS 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rafael Simon Maia
    • 1
  • Christian Jacob
    • 1
  • Amy K. Hara
    • 2
  • Alvin C. Silva
    • 2
  • William Pavlicek
    • 2
  • J. Ross Mitchell
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  2. 2.Department of RadiologyMayo ClinicScottsdaleUSA

Personalised recommendations