Thursday Case of the Day The likely cause of the artifact is: A. Patient Motion B. Improper Cupping Correction C.Off-Focus Radiation combined with heel.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Computed Tomography Principles
Advertisements

CT Scanning: Dosimetry and Artefacts
Image Reconstruction.
Image Quality Bushong Chapter 7.
IMAGE QUALITY.
RADIOLOGY. NEXT GENERATION SCIENCE / COMMON CORE STANDARDS ADDRESSED! CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RST Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text;
Historical Development
Chapter 17 The Grid So far we have discussed how kVp, patient size and collimation impact scatter radiation. As the part size and kVp increase, scatter.
Image Artifacts Chapter 8 Bushong.
X-ray diagnostics and Computed tomography. 15th century head examination.
Computed Tomography II
Spiral CT Bushong Chapter 5.
Seeram Chapter 13: Single Slice Spiral - Helical CT
MULTISLICE CT.
5 th September 2005 Paul Collins Computed Tomography Dosimetry Assessment of Effective Dose in Computed Tomography using an Anthropomorphic Phantom Paul.
Advanced Biomedical Imaging
CT Multi-Slice CT.
IMAGE QUALITY NOISE LINEARITY CROSS-FIELD UNIFORMITY IMAGE ARTIFACTS.
BMME 560 & BME 590I Medical Imaging: X-ray, CT, and Nuclear Methods
Computed Tomography III
Historical Perspective
tomos = slice, graphein = to write
Chapter 2 Stewart C. Bushong
CT scanning (f) Candidates should be able to show an understanding of the principles of CT scanning. (g) Candidates should be able to show an understanding.
Conventional and Computed Tomography
Bones Radiographs AP & Obl Ax & WP Y & ACJ AC Injury GH Dislocate Anterior Posterior CT Final Case Conclusion © 2014 Ken L Schreibman, PhD/MD
Seeram Chapter 11: Image Quality
Basic principles Geometry and historical development
COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY I – RAD 365 CT - Scan
Medical Image Analysis Medical Imaging Modalities: X-Ray Imaging Figures come from the textbook: Medical Image Analysis, Second Edition, by Atam P. Dhawan,
Computer Tomography By Moustafa M. Mohamed. Introduction to Medical Imaging Uses of medical imaging Obtain information about internal body organs or the.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Dental Radiology Radiation Sources in medicine diagnostic Radiology Day 7 – Lecture 2(2)
Computed Tomography Q & A
Fan Yang, M.D., Ph.D. Ichiro Ikuta, M.D., M.M.Sc. Head Holder Image Artifact: Shadows in the midst of Light, and How We Fixed It. 34 Maple Street Norwalk,
CT Instrumentation and X-ray system
S Demehri 1, M.K Kalra 2, M.L Steigner 1, F.J Rybicki 1, M.J. Lang, 3, S.G Silverman 1. 1.Department of Radiology, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Harvard.
Module A Computed Tomography Physics, Instrumentation, and Imaging.
Module C Computed Tomography Physics, Instrumentation, and Imaging.
Radiation Sources in medicine diagnostic Radiology
CT IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION  Hounsfield envisioned dividing a slice into a matrix of 3-dimensional rectangular boxes (voxels) of material (tissue). Conventionally,
Part No...., Module No....Lesson No
Part No...., Module No....Lesson No
Quality Assurance.
Monday Case of the Day History: Multiple examinations from a CT scanner using a standard helical scan protocol show diffuse hypointense regions of artifact.
Monday Case of the Day History: During acceptance testing of a new general radiographic room, tube output measurements differed between the small and large.
Sergeo Guilbaud School of Radiologic Sciences
CONVENTIONAL AND SPIRAL/HELICAL CT
History: A 61-year-old man with suspected thoracic aneurysm underwent ECG-gated chest CT angiogram. He was instructed to hold his breath during the exam.
Copyright © 2012, 2006, 2000, 1996 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. Chapter 26 Three-Dimensional Digital Imaging.
CT aRTifacts.
Computed Tomography Computed Tomography is the most significant development in radiology in the past 40 years. MRI and Ultrasound are also significant.
Purpose The CT examination is first tool to detect brain ICH or skull bone fracture. But the skull fontanel and suture is developing in infant and child,
Sunday Case of the Day History : Patient presented for screening mammogram. The radiologist noted that there “increased motion on both CC views” limiting.
Computed Tomography The images in the following presentation follow the “fair use” rules of the U.S. Copyright law.
Sunday Case of the Day How does the presence of the object impact patient dose? A. Increases by 20% - 50% B. Increases by 3% - 5% C. No Change D. Decreases.
Single Slice Spiral - Helical CT
CT Multi-Slice CT.
Computed Tomography Basics
Sunday Case of the Day Physics
Optimisation of Patient Protection for Radiography
Pediatric Radiology By Dr. Wambani, J.S. Chief Radiologist
بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم ..
Wednesday Case of the Day
Tuesday Case of the Day Physics
Basic principles Geometry and historical development
David J. Brenner, Maria A. Georgsson  Gastroenterology 
This figure shows a CT scan acquired using a multi-detector row CT scanner. a) The conventional transverse image and the b) coronal and c) sagittal reformats.
Thursday Case of the Day
Computed Tomography (C.T)
MRI basics for radiation oncologists
Presentation transcript:

Thursday Case of the Day The likely cause of the artifact is: A. Patient Motion B. Improper Cupping Correction C.Off-Focus Radiation combined with heel effect causing HU gradient at bone- brain interface across detector rows. D.Beam Hardening History: A new CT scanner was installed in the ED with a lightweight, low power (72 kW) x-ray tube without a secondary (rebound) electron collection mechanism. Dark lines were observed by radiologists in coronal and sagittal reformats of CT head scans performed in axial (non-helical) mode. Authors : Robert MacDougall, M.Sc., DABR Boston Children’s Hospital Physics Figure 1: Coronal and sagittal reformats showing radiolucent (dark) “line” artifacts

Findings: All detector calibrations were performed and found to be within manufacturer acceptance limits. The mechanical stability of the table was verified to be operating at specification by a service engineer. Addition tests and measurements were performed to isolate the cause of the artifact: Figure 2: Artifact “period” (i.e. distance between artifact lines) was found to match nominal beam collimation (10 mm). 1. From clinical scans, the distance between artifact “lines” was confirmed to match the nominal beam collimation by a medical physicist. 10 mm

Findings: 3. The artifact was not observed in transaxial images. Figure 3: Transaxial image with no visible artifact 2. A stationary head phantom was scanned and the artifact was found to be reproducible in a motionless phantom. The artifact was also more severe for wider beam collimations.

Diagnosis: C. Off-Focus Radiation combined with heel effect causing HU gradient at bone-brain interface across detector rows.

Discussion: Off-focus radiation is created by rebound electrons that strike the target away from the focal spot. If these these rebound electrons are not collected by a secondary electron capture mechanism, the radiation produced will lead to reduced contrast at in the bone/brain interface. Figure 4. The Physics of Off-focal radiation

Discussion: The heel effect makes the effect of off-focal radiation detector-row dependent and as a result the bone/brain interface will have higher contrast in the anode direction (less off-focal radiation). Figure 4: Impact of heel effect of off-focal radiation and bone/brain interface at different detector-row locations. an

Discussion: Since the effect of off-focal radiation is z-axis dependent, it is most visible in multi-planar reformats such as coronal and sagittal views where there is a sharp border between contiguous beam collimations and hence detector rows. The artifact will not be visible in individual transaxial reformats. The artifact is also much less visible in helical mode acquisition where interpolated detector data is used for image reconstruction. Figure 5: From left – Transaxial, Coronal and Sagittal reformats. The artifact is only visible in the coronal and sagittal images

References/Bibliography: Johns HE, Cunningham JR. Physics of Radiology, Fourth Edition. 4 Sub edition. Springfield, Ill., U.S.A: Charles C Thomas Pub Ltd; Curry TS, Dowdey JE, Murry RC. Christensen’s Physics of Diagnostic Radiology. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1990 (pg. 25) Bushberg JT. The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Barrett JF, Keat N. Artifacts in CT: Recognition and Avoidance. RadioGraphics Nov 1;24(6):1679–91

Teaching Points: Off-focus radiation is rarely considered in the diagnosis of CT artifacts because tubes have traditionally been built with rebound electron capture mechanism (e.g. a metal envelope at ground potential surrounding the anode). Lighter tubes are being introduced at lower power levels that do not incorporate a rebound electron capture mechanism. Off-focus radiation negatively impacts image quality, particularly at the border of the skull/brain interface in neuro CT and can lead to artifacts in MPR images. Typically, only axial scan modes are affected by off-focal radiation The intended scan modes and the x-ray tube design should be carefully considered in the purchase of a new CT scanner.