No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Grating-based phase contrast tomosynthesis imaging: Proof-of-concept experimental studies
2. A. Tingberg, “X-ray tomosynthesis: A review of its use for breast and chest imaging,” Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 139, 1–8 (2010).
4. I. Sechopoulos, “A review of breast tomosynthesis. Part II. Image reconstruction, processing and analysis, and advanced applications,” Med. Phys. 40, 014302 (17pp.) (2013).
5. L. T. Niklason, B. T. Christian, L. E. Niklason, D. B. Kopans, D. E. Castleberry, B. H. Opsahl-Ong, C. E. Landberg, P. J. Slanetz, A. A. Giardino, R. Moore, D. Albagli, M. C. DeJule, P. F. Fitzgerald, D. F. Fobare, B. W. Giambattista, R. F. Kwasnick, J. Liu, S. J. Lubowski, G. E. Possin, J. F. Richotte, C. Y. Wei, and R. F. Wirth, “Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging,” Radiology 205, 399–406 (1997).
6. J. Als-Nielsen and D. McMorrow, Elements of Modern X-Ray Physics (Wiley, New York, 2001).
7. A. Maksimenko, T. Yuasa, M. Ando, and E. Hashimoto, “Refraction-based tomosynthesis: Proof of the concept,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 234108 (2007).
8. K. Kang, Z. Huang, P. Zhu, and L. Zhang, “DEI-based phase-contrast tomosynthetic experiment on biological samples with high resolution x-ray CCD camera,” 2008 IEEE NSS Conference Record (Dresden, Germany, 2008), pp. 1451–1454.
9. L. Zhang, M. Jin, Z. Huang, Y. Xiao, H. Yin, Z. Wang, and T. Xiao, “Phase-contrast tomosynthetic experiment on biological samples with synchrotron radiation,” 2010 IEEE NSS Conference Record (Knoxville, TN, 2010), pp. 1619–1621.
10. J. C. Hammonds, R. R. Price, E. F. Donnelly, and D. R. Pickens, “Phase-contrast digital tomosynthesis,” Med. Phys. 38, 2353–2358 (2011).
12. A. Yan, X. Wu, and H. Liu, “Performance analysis of the attenuation-partition based iterative phase retrieval algorithm for in-line phase-contrast imaging,” Opt. Express 18, 16074–16089 (2010).
13. J. C. Hammonds, R. R. Price, D. R. Pickens, and E. F. Donnelly, “In-line phase shift tomosynthesis,” Med. Phys. 40, 081911 (5pp.) (2013).
14. A. Momose, S. Kawamoto, I. Koyama, Y. Hamaishi, H. Takai, and Y. Suzuki, “Demonstration of x-ray Talbot interferometry,” Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 42, L866–L868 (2003).
15. T. Weitkamp, A. Diaz, C. David, F. Pfeiffer, M. Stampanoni, P. Cloetens, and E. Zeigler, “X-ray phase imaging with a grating interferometer,” Opt. Express 13, 6296–6304 (2005).
16. F. Pfeiffer, T. Weitkamp, O. Bunk, and C. David, “Phase retrieval and differential phase-contrast imaging with low-brilliance x-ray sources,” Nat. Phys. 2, 258–261 (2006).
17. J. Zambelli, N. Bevins, Z. Qi, and G.-H. Chen, “Radiation dose efficiency comparison between differential phase contrast CT and conventional absorption CT,” Med. Phys. 37, 2473–2479 (2010).
18. G. Chen, J. Zambelli, K. Li, N. Bevins, and Z. Qi, “Scaling law for noise variance and spatial resolution in differential phase contrast computed tomography,” Med. Phys. 38, 584–588 (2011).
19. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics (Pergamon, New York, 1993).
20. G. Sato, T. Kondoh, H. Itoh, S. Handa, K. Yamaguchi, T. Nakamura, K. Nagai, C. Ouchi, T. Teshima, Y. Setomoto, and T. Den, “Two-dimensional gratings-based phase-contrast imaging using a conventional x-ray tube,” Opt. Lett. 36, 3551–3553 (2011).
21. N. Bevins, J. Zambelli, K. Li, Z. Qi, and G.-H. Chen, “Multicontrast x-ray computed tomography imaging using Talbot-Lau interferometry without phase stepping,” Med. Phys. 39, 424–428 (2012).
22. G. Lauritsch and W. Haerer, “Theoretical framework for filtered back projection in tomosynthesis,” Proc. SPIE 3338, 1127–1137 (1998).
23. T. Wu, R. Moore, E. Rafferty, and D. Kopans, “A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis,” Med. Phys. 31, 2636–2647 (2004).
27. M. S. del Rio and R. J. Dejus, X-ray Oriented Programs (XOP), Version 2.3 (European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), Grenoble, France, 2009).
28. I. Sechopoulos and C. Ghetti, “Optimization of the acquisition geometry in digital tomosynthesis of the breast,” Med. Phys. 36, 1199–1207 (2009).
29. D. Stutman and M. Finkenthal, “Glancing angle Talbot-Lau grating interferometers for phase contrast imaging at high x-ray energy,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 101, 091108 (2012).
30. D. Stutman, J. W. Stayman, M. Finkenthal, and J. H. Siewerdsen, “High energy x-ray phase-contrast imaging using glancing angle grating interferometers,” Proc. SPIE 8668, 866814 (2013).
31. K. Li, N. Bevins, J. Zambelli, and G.-H. Chen, “Fundamental relationship between the noise properties of grating-based differential phase contrast CT and absorption CT: Theoretical framework using a cascaded system model and experimental validation,” Med. Phys. 40, 021908 (15pp.) (2013).
32. K. Li, J. Zambelli, N. Bevins, Y. Ge, and G.-H. Chen, “Spatial resolution characterization of differential phase contrast CT systems via modulation transfer function (MTF) measurements,” Phys. Med. Biol. 58, 4119–4135 (2013).
Article metrics loading...
This paper concerns the feasibility of x-ray differential phase contrast (DPC) tomosynthesis imaging using a grating-based DPC benchtop experimental system, which is equipped with a commercial digital flat-panel detector and a medical-grade rotating-anode x-ray tube. An extensive system characterization was performed to quantify its imaging performance.
The major components of the benchtop system include a diagnostic x-ray tube with a 1.0 mm nominal focal spot size, a flat-panel detector with 96 μm pixel pitch, a sample stage that rotates within a limited angular span of ±30°, and a Talbot-Lau interferometer with three x-ray gratings. A total of 21 projection views acquired with 3° increments were used to reconstruct three sets of tomosynthetic image volumes, including the conventional absorption contrast tomosynthesis image volume (AC-tomo) reconstructed using the filtered-backprojection (FBP) algorithm with the ramp kernel, the phase contrast tomosynthesis image volume (PC-tomo) reconstructed using FBP with a Hilbert kernel, and the differential phase contrast tomosynthesis image volume (DPC-tomo) reconstructed using the shift-and-add algorithm. Three inhouse physical phantoms containing tissue-surrogate materials were used to characterize the signal linearity, the signal difference-to-noise ratio (SDNR), the three-dimensional noise power spectrum (3D NPS), and the through-plane artifact spread function (ASF).
While DPC-tomo highlights edges and interfaces in the image object, PC-tomo removes the differential nature of the DPC projection data and its pixel values are linearly related to the decrement of the real part of the x-ray refractive index. The SDNR values of polyoxymethylene in water and polystyrene in oil are 1.5 and 1.0, respectively, in AC-tomo, and the values were improved to 3.0 and 2.0, respectively, in PC-tomo. PC-tomo and AC-tomo demonstrate equivalent ASF, but their noise characteristics quantified by the 3D NPS were found to be different due to the difference in the tomosynthesis image reconstruction algorithms.
It is feasible to simultaneously generate x-ray differential phase contrast, phase contrast, and absorption contrast tomosynthesis images using a grating-based data acquisition setup. The method shows promise in improving the visibility of several low-density materials and therefore merits further investigation.
Full text loading...
Most read this month