Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the magnification of an aneurysm size according to the type of reconstruction of a 3-dimensional Computed tomography (CT) scan. The aneurysm was prepared by mixing angiografin and saline in a rubber balloon of 51 mm in width and 77 mm in length. The balloon was placed in a plastic barrel and fixed with paraffin. CT scans were used to obtain scan data of the balloons, and the multi planar reformation (MPR), maximum intensity projection (MIP), shaded surface display (SSD), and volume rendering technique (VRT) were obtained by using 3D reconstruction. The size of the measurement points was measured and compared with the measured values of the actual aneurysm phantom. As a result of the comparison between measured and actual values in the 3D reconstruction images, all of them were enlarged. The VRT method displayed the smallest enlargement. On the other hand, the sagittal images that were obtained using the MPR method displayed an average difference of about 5.32 mm in transverse length and an average transverse length of about 2.72 mm. In conclusion, the reconstruction technique that produced an aneurysm size similar to the actual size was the VRT, and the reconstruction of the aneurysm using the VRT could be performed three-dimensionally and compared with other techniques. Therefore, observation of the anatomical site is excellent. In addition, the size determined from the enlargement of the reconstructed image was similar to the actual size; therefore, it can be helpful for establishing an effective treatment plan.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
J. Hsieh, Med. Phys. 23, 221 (1996).
D. R. Ney, E. K. Fishman, D. Magid, D. D. Robertson and A. Kawashima, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 15, 875 (1991).
P. S. Calhoun, B. S. Kuszyk, D. G. Heath, J. C. Carley and E. K. Fishman, Radiographics 19, 745 (1999).
Y. K. Kim, S. K. Baik, Mi Jeong Shin and H. Y. Choi, J. Korean Radiol. Soc. 44, 665 (2001).
D. Sforza, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 41, 91 (2009).
T. Ogawa, T. Okudera, K. Noguchi, N. Sasaki, A. Inugami, K. Uemura and N Yasui, Am. J. Neuroradiol. 17, 447 (1996).
J. N. Hsiang, E. Y. Liang, J. M. Lam, X. L. Zhu and W. S. Poon, Neurosurgery 38, 481 (1996).
S. C. Rankin, Eur. J. Radiol. 28, 18 (1998).
G. D. Rubin, S. Napel and A. N. Leung, Radiology 200, 312 (1996).
G. D. Rubin, Multi-slice helical tomography: a practical approach to clinical protocols (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, Pa, 2002), p. 317
N. C. Dalrymple, S. R. Prasad, M. W. Freckleton and K. N. Chintapalli, Radiographics 25, 1409 (2005).
M. Levoy, IEEE Comp. Graph. Appl. 8, 29 (1988).
J. M. de Oliveira, F. Z. C. de LimaI, J. A. de Milito and A. C. G. Martins, Braz. J. Phys. 35, 789 (2005).
B. T. Phong, Commun. ACM. 18, 311 (1975).
J. Blinn, Comp. Graph. 11, 192 (1977).
L. N. Hopkins, G. Lanzino and L. R. Guterman, Neurosurgery 48, 463 (2001).
J. Y. Kim, D. K. Lee and S. H. Lee, J. Korean Assoc. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 36, 262 (2010).
M. G. P. Cavalcanti and M. W. Vanner, Dentomaxillofac. Radiol. 27, 344 (1998).
S. Nawaratne, R. Fabiny, J. E. Brien, J. Zalcberg, W. Cosolo, A. Whan and D. J. Morgan, J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 21, 481 (1997).
S. R. Matteson, W. Bechtold and C. Philips, J. Oral. Maxillofac. Surg. 47, 1053 (1989).
C. F. Hildebolt, M. W. Vannier and R. H. Knapp, Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 82, 283 (1990).
E. K. Fishman, B. Drebin and D. Magid, Radiology 163, 737 (1987).
G. D. Rubin, Eur. J. Radiol. 45, S37 (2003).
G. D. Rubin, M. D. Dake and C. P. Semba, Radiol. Clin. North Am. 33, 51 (1995).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lee, Sy., Kim, HG., Kim, HS. et al. Comparison of Image Enlargement according to 3D Reconstruction in a CT Scan: Using an Aneurysm Phantom. J. Korean Phys. Soc. 72, 805–810 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.72.805
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.72.805