Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Scatter correction in cone-beam CT via a half beam blocker technique allowing simultaneous acquisition of
scatter and image informationa)
Med. Phys. 39, 2386 (2012); 10.1118/1.3691901
Antiscatter grids in mobile C-arm cone-beam CT: Effect on image quality and dose
Med. Phys. 39, 153 (2012); 10.1118/1.3666947
Shading correction for on-board cone-beam CT in radiation therapy using planning MDCT images
Med. Phys. 37, 5395 (2010); 10.1118/1.3483260
Key words: bowtie filter, Elekta synergy CBCT system, image quality, dose
22 Med. Phys. 36 „1…, January 2009 0094-2405/2009/36„1…/22/11/$25.00 © 2009 Am. Assoc. Phys. Med. 22
23 Mail et al.: The influence of bowtie filtration on cone-beam CT image quality 23
8>9
;<:
(!==$7>#!-
4: 8&9
(7 8(9
!"#$%
;<:
)*!+(%,#%-
../ 1 23456 (7 (!==$7>#!-
3456
(7
!&'%(# !&'%(#
3456
(7 ../ 1 23456 (7
)*!+(%,#%- ;<:
(!==$7>#!-
!"#$%
4:
(7
FIG. 1. 共a兲 A photograph of the cone-beam CT Elekta Synergy CBCT system. 共b兲 A schematic of the CBCT offset geometry at angle 0 deg and medium FOV.
共c兲 Schematic of the CBCT offset geometry and medium FOV after 180 deg rotation.
target, and 0.8 mm focal spot. The detector used was the The difference between the three is the edge to the kV central
RID1640-Al1 共Perkin Elmer, Wiesbaden, Germany兲 indirect- beam, which is 138 mm for the small FOV, 213 mm for the
detection flat-panel imager with a 1024⫻ 1024 array of medium FOV, and 262 mm for the large field of view. Dur-
0.4 mm⫻ 0.4 mm pixels and a 0.55 mm thick CsI:Tl x-ray ing 360 deg rotations the system acquires approximately 650
converter. The geometry of the system was configured to projection images. The size of the flat-panel detector is 410
have a source-to-isocenter distance of 100 cm and source-to- ⫻ 410 mm2 and is located at a fixed source to detector dis-
detector distance of 153.6 cm. tance, resulting in limited FOVs along the x and z direction.
The x-ray tube and flat-panel imager were placed orthogo- An offset scanning geometry was used, in which the imager
nally to the treatment head and its EPID imaging device. The was shifted laterally 10 cm and a corresponding asymmetric
kV system shares a common axis of rotation with the MV beam, defined by an M20 collimator, was utilized to scan a
treatment source. The kV beam is 425⫻ 425 mm2 incident larger FOV. This offset geometry 关Fig. 1共b兲兴 was used to
on the flat-panel detector. Images can be acquired with three provide the optimum image sets, in terms of quality and
different fields-of-view 共FOV兲; small, medium, and large. reconstructed FOV. The Feldkamp algorithm for 3D filtered
35
(a) (b)
85mm 25
Thickness (mm)
15
117mm
-5
-10 15 40 65 90 115 140
Length (mm)
FIG. 2. 共a兲 Photograph of the Elekta designed bowtie filter. 共b兲 Bowtie thickness measured with needle gauge as a function of length.
1622
!" *$+$,''- .$,$$' )"
1621 /+01,$0.$,23
1604
1602
(" /0 1 0 2 3 4 51 50 52 53
89&*9: &*")9+(# ;%!< (#+)#% =(<>
'$$ &&
##$ &&
FIG. 3. 共a兲 A schematic diagram of the CTDI body phantom. 共b兲 Percentage of dose reduction with bowtie filter is plotted as a function of radial distance from
the phantom center. Symbol represents measured data and solid line theoretical fit. 共c兲 Circular 共Catphan兲 phantom with an irregular annulus 共human torso兲.
back-projection algorithm was used for CBCT reconstruc- quality, and mAs/projections were the same for both cases.
tion, with a Hann reconstruction filter. The total recon- The phantom 共shown in Fig. 3共a兲兴 was a PMMA CTDI do-
structed volume used in this work was 410⫻ 410 simetry phantom with diameter of 320 mm and thickness of
⫻ 264 mm3 with voxel size of 1 ⫻ 1 ⫻ 1 mm3. 150 mm 共RTI Electronics, Mölndal, Sweden兲. Two low-
density polyethylene 共LDPE兲 blocks 共32⫻ 32⫻ 15 cm3兲
II.B. Bowtie filter were placed superior and inferior to the acrylic phantom to
simulate scattered dose. The center of the phantom was
An aluminum bowtie filter 共Elekta, Filter Cassette Assem-
placed at the machine isocenter position. This specially de-
bly, F1兲 was employed for all the tests described here. This
signed phantom allows for accurate positioning of radiation
F1 filter was inserted in the filter tray 30 cm from the x-ray
detectors. A 0.6 cc farmer-type ion chamber 共NE 2571,
source on an Elekta Synergy XVI unit. For the medium FOV,
Nuclear Associates兲 and Fluke 3504 electrometer at atmo-
a cassette of M20 collimator was inserted between the x-ray
spheric pressure 756.2 共mmHg兲 and room temperature
tube and F1 filter shown in Fig. 2共a兲. There are various pos-
sible designs for bowtie filters implemented on Elekta Syn- 22 ° C was used for dose measurements. The dose was mea-
ergy XVI systems. Bowtie filters could potentially be opti- sured at five different radial positions of the phantom, start-
mized based on a variety of imaging tasks while accounting ing from the phantom center to the skin. A total of five
for tradeoffs between image quality and patient dose. The CBCT scans were obtained, with and without a bowtie filter
design of the bowtie filter used here is based on patient size, at 120 kVp and 1.6 mAs per projection 共⬃660 projections兲.
dose, nominal x-ray energy, and material. The ratio of doses with and without bowtie was modeled for
The bowtie filter used in this study 关Fig. 2共a兲兴 has no all the radial positions of the phantom’s center to periphery.
modulation in the z direction. The filter used for this work This model contained four fitting coefficients and is very
was built based on the objective of achieving uniform flu- useful to compute the dose reduction attributed to the bowtie
ence through a cylindrical water phantom of diameter at any radial position of the CTDI phantom.
300 mm measured at 120 kVp. The manufacturing material
was aluminum of size 85⫻ 135 mm2. The bowtie filter thick- II.D. Scatter-to-primary ratio measurements
ness measured with a needle gauge as a function of length is Scatter-to-primary ratio was measured for imaging condi-
shown in Fig. 2共b兲. The filter was rigidly mounted in the tions with and without the bowtie filter using a beam-blocker
cassette with a 1 mm thick acrylic covering protecting it method.9 The SPR can be defined as
from physical damage or scratching.
S
SPR = , 共1兲
II.C. Dosimetry measurements P
Dose measurements were made with and without a bowtie where S is the energy integrated signal of the scattered ra-
filter, such that the scanning geometry, phantom size, beam diation measured as the average of a 10⫻ 10 pixel2 area on
the FPI, and P is the signal from the primary radiation. The without the bowtie filter. Imaging metrics were also per-
same CBCT system/geometry was used as discussed in Sec. formed on images generated on a conventional CT scanner.
II A. The SPR measurements were performed at the center
and edge of the projection image for the circular and irregu- II.E.1. Uniformity
lar 关posterior-anterior 共PA兲 view兴 phantoms. A 10⫻ 10 The uniformity measurements were performed on the cir-
⫻ 4 mm3 lead block was placed on the central axis before the cular and irregular phantoms. The circular phantom contains
phantom on the side facing the source. The scatter account- a uniform, water-equivalent portion 共CTP486兲 with CT num-
ing for shadowing a part of the phantom by the blocker was ber 共HU兲 within −10 and +10 HU at standard scanning pro-
not included for this SPR data. Twenty 共20兲 images of the tocols. The CBCT images were analyzed in Matlab. Five
circular and irregular phantoms were acquired with and with- ROIs of size 10⫻ 10 mm2 were selected in CBCT images of
out the bowtie filter at the tube voltage of 120 kVp and ex- the phantom—one at the center and four at peripheral posi-
posures 1.0 and 1.6 mAs, respectively. The SPR measure- tions symmetrically around the center, each within the cen-
ments were performed on an irregular phantom at equivalent tral axial plane. The spatial nonuniformity 共SNU兲 was de-
patient dose techniques 共0.1 mGy/exposure兲 for with and fined as
without the bowtie filter. This required an exposure of
1.6 mAs/projection 共bowtie filter兲 as compared to VVmax − VVmin
SNU = ⫻ 100, 共2兲
1.0 mAs/projection 共without bowtie filter兲 at 120 kVp. The 1000
same procedure was used for the SPR measurements at the
phantom’s edge except the block was moved from the center where VVmax and VVmin are the maximum and minimum
to the edge of the phantom’s projection. mean voxel values, respectively, within each ROI.
TABLE I. The scatter, primary, and scatter-to-primary ratios behind the center and edge of the circular 共Cat-
Phan500兲 phantom using lead strip of size 10⫻ 10⫻ 3.5 mm3.
and irregular phantoms. For each individual phantom, the II.F. Patient study
imaging conditions including kVp, exposure time, and tube CBCT image quality measurements including uniformity
current were the same, with and without the bowtie filter. and skinline reconstruction were performed on ten gyneco-
ROIs of size 4 ⫻ 4 mm2 共⬃4 ⫻ 4 voxels兲 within each insert logical patients. But only one patient is reported here be-
were used to measure the mean and standard deviation
cause there were no significant differences from patient to
共noise兲 in HU value. The mean HU value was measured for
patient. Images were acquired with and without a bowtie
each contrast insert. The CNR 共signal difference divided by
filter at 120 kVp and 1.6 mAs 共⬃650 projections acquired
average noise兲 values was calculated as
across 360 deg. The same CBCT system geometry and pro-
关HU共LDPE兲 − HU共PS兲兴 cedure was used as explained in the phantom study section.
CNR = 2 ⫻ , 共4兲 CBCT reconstructions with and without bowtie filter were
Noise共LDPE兲 + Noise共PS兲
analyzed quantitatively 共difference images兲 and qualitatively
where HU共LDPE兲 and HU共PS兲 are the mean voxel values in 共examination by a radiation oncologist兲. Of specific interest
LDPE and PS, respectively, and Noise共LDPE兲 and in these studies were the gynecological patient contrast and
Noise共PS兲 are the standard deviation in voxel values in the reduction in CT number 共cupping artifact兲 from the skin-
LDPE and PS, respectively. line to the center of the image.
TABLE II. The scatter, primary, and scatter to primary ratios behind the center and edge of the irregular
共Cat-Irreg兲 phantom using lead strip of size 10⫻ 10⫻ 3.5 mm3.
!" )" the unwanted signal at the object’s periphery and hence im-
proves the SPR behind the phantom’s center and prevents
detector saturation at the skin zone.
;*<=>0< 2>;<*,
file position is indicated by a dotted line in the image. Image
%"" ?>;<*,
关Fig. 4共a兲兴 and its profile both show severe reduction in CT
$"" number near the skin zone, which reduces as a function of
#"" skin depth. This is due to the signal range of the detector
!"""
共saturation兲 at the periphery of the phantom, leading to a loss
!" '" !'" &'" ('" %'" of information in projections that creates a skinline artifact in
)*+,- /012,3 the reconstruction. Approximately 15% of average reduction
in CT number was measured at 1 cm skin depth. The CBCT
FIG. 4. Trans-axial images of uniform water portion of a circular phantom
共Catphan兲 acquired 共a兲 without 共window level −130 to 150 HU and 共b兲 with
image with the bowtie filter 关Fig. 4共b兲兴 and its profile 关Fig.
bowtie filter 共window level: −130 to 150 HU兲. 共c兲 Profiles through the uni- 4共c兲兴 demonstrate significant improvement in the recovery of
form water portion of the circular phantom with and without bowtie; the CT number at the skin zone compared to the nominal case.
profile position is indicated by a dotted line in image. Almost 100% of the CT number is restored at 1 cm skin
depth. The bowtie filter improves image uniformity by 共i兲
flattening of the fluence profile at the detector 共thereby re-
function of the radial distance, X, from the center of the ducing the dynamic range requirement and preventing detec-
dosimetry phantom was calculated using an LPF function: tor saturation at the skinline兲 and 共ii兲 attenuates more fluence
at the edge of the field which reduces the primary beam on
2AB the periphery of the phantom, which, in turn reduces scatter
D共X兲 = D0 + , 共5兲 throughout the image. The reduction in scatter throughout
4共X − C兲 + B2
the image has the greatest advantage in the center of the
where D0 is the intercept and A, B, and C are the fitting image where the bowtie has minimally affected the primary
coefficients. The values of the intercept and fitting coeffi- fluence. The mean spatial non-uniformity, as defined in Eq.
cients are listed in Fig. 3共b兲. With the help of Eq. 共5兲, the 共2兲, was 2.1% and 9.8% for image acquired with and without
dose reduction with the bowtie filter can be calculated for a bowtie filter, respectively. The higher non-uniformity num-
any radial distance within the body phantom. Also this em- ber as defined in Eq. 共2兲 means poorer uniformity.
pirical fit will assist in the design for an optimum bowtie Trans-axial CBCT images of irregular phantom acquired
filter. without and with bowtie filter are shown in Figs. 5共a兲 and
5共b兲, respectively, at the same window/level. The difference
image 共image without bowtie subtracted from the image ac-
quired with bowtie兲 is shown in Fig. 5共c兲. Profiles through
III.B. Scatter-to-primary ratio
the reconstructed slices of CBCT images are compared with
The SPR at the center of each phantom is higher than the helical CT in Fig. 5共d兲, with the bowtie filter case providing
SPR measured at the edges. But the absolute scatter signal is an improvement in edge definition. The images and profiles
higher at the edges of both phantoms including circular and show a severe reduction of CT number near the skin zone in
irregular. The SPR values for the circular and irregular phan- the nominal CBCT image. Since the irregular phantom is
toms for with and without bowtie filter are listed in Tables I larger in size than the circular phantom, a higher exposure is
and II, respectively. It shows that the scatter signal at the required for sufficient signal behind the center of the object,
phantom’s edge is higher than the primary signal at the cen- resulting in increased pixel saturation near the phantom pe-
ter for the case without the bowtie filter. The absolute scatter riphery, which is the main source of CT number reduction at
signal at the edges of both phantoms is almost two times less the skinline. Even with the bowtie filter case, there is still
than without the bowtie filter. This high absolute scatter sig- some missing skin on the right shoulder of the image profile
nal strongly affects the SPR behind the center of the phantom in Fig. 5共d兲. This is due to the detector lag and ghosting
and hence image quality. Also, the SPR values at the center effects. As the object is irregularly shaped, the projected lo-
and edge are higher for the irregular phantom because of the cation of skinline relative to previous projections causes an
size and excessive fluence at the edge that creates high scat- accumulated lag signal that degrades the reconstruction and
ter and affects the SPR at the center 共throughout the image兲. results in reduction in CT number in the skinline zone. The
The bowtie filter shapes and modulates the beam to reduce gantry rotates clockwise around an irregular phantom, which
"
45 6789:
("" ;*<=>0< 2>;<*,
?>;<*, !"" ;*<=>0< 2>;<*,
$""
45 ?>;<*,
&"" 45
'""
(""
!&""
!" '" !'" &'" ('" &&" &%" &$" &#" ("" (&"
)>+*<*>/ 7112:
)>+*<*>/ 711:
%"
).* "2" @1 +I*/ E,C<=
(&
!@1 +I*/ E,C<=
& @1 +I*/ E,C<=
F45G 7H:
&%
!$
"
;*<=>0< 2>;<*, ?>;<*,
5,@=/*A0,+ BCC-*,E
FIG. 5. Trans-axial CBCT images of irregular 共Cat-Irreg兲 phantom 共a兲 without 共window level: −350 to 500 HU兲 and 共b兲 with bowtie filter 共window level:
−350 to 500 HU兲. 共c兲 The difference of image 共b兲 and 共a兲. 共d兲 Profiles through the uniform water portion of the irregular phantom. 共e兲 The right shoulder of
共d兲 is magnified to see the missing skinline more clearly. 共f兲 Reduction in CT number 共RCTN兲 at several skin depths for with and without bowtie filter.
!"""
(-* ;*<=>0< 2>;<*,
2>;<*,
()* (+* """ 45
45 6 789:
"
"""
!"""
" "" !"" !"" &"" &"" ("" (""
)*+,- /012,3
!&"
(%* D*<=>0< 2>;<*,
?>;<*,
#"
A33>3B 45 4?45 789:
%"
(,*
"
%"
#"
!!"" $"" !"" %"" '""
>E,B- 45 /012,3
FIG. 6. Trans-axial images of circular phantom with several contrast inserts acquired 共a兲 without 共window level −800 to 500 HU兲 and 共b兲 with bowtie filter
共window level −800 to 500 HU兲. 共c兲 The same image shown in 共a兲, but transformed into polar coordinate 共window level −800 to 500 HU兲. 共d兲 Profiles
through the image 共c兲 with several inserts are compared with CT and without bowtie filter. 共e兲 The difference between the measured CT and CBCT number
plotted as a function of Ideal CT number for several inserts. The empty circle and filled square symbols represent CT number error with and without bowtie.
A gray solid line represents a linear fit to bowtie data.
'" &%$
*" !"
&$$
#%$
#$$
""
"
""
!""
!""
(" )"
45 +@B/
&""" ;*<=>0< 2>;<*,
+"
?>;<*,
4,B+03,E 45 6789:2
!%"" B*/,B3 745 +@B/:
B*/,B3 7;*<=>0< 2>;<*,:
#"" B*/,B3 7?>;<*,:
&""
%""
!"""
!""" %"" &"" #"" !%"" &"""
>E,B- 45 6789:
FIG. 7. Trans-axial CBCT images of irregular 共CatគIrreg兲 with several inserts, 共a兲 without bowtie 共window level −350 to 500 HU兲 and 共b兲 with bowtie filter
共window level −350 to 500 HU兲. 共c兲 The difference of image 共b兲 and 共a兲. 共d兲 The same image in 共a兲 but converted into polar coordinates 共window level
−700 to 300 HU兲. 共e兲 The same image in 共b兲 but converted into polar coordinates to make it simple for analysis such as CT number accuracy and streaking
artifacts 共window level −700 to 300 HU兲. 共f兲 The measured CT number plotted as a function of ideal CT number for several inserts.
causes lag on the right side of the image. Mail et al.16 quan- spectively. For convenient analysis, the image in Fig. 6共b兲
titatively explained this lag effect in CBCT images of irregu- was transformed into polar coordinate in Fig. 6共c兲. A profile
lar phantom acquired with and without bowtie filter. Even through several inserts, indicated by a dotted line in image, is
without a bowtie filter, the reduction in CT number at the shown in Fig. 6共d兲. The dotted, solid black, and gray solid
skinline is worse on the right shoulder than the left in Fig. lines represent CT and CBCT with and without bowtie filter
5共d兲, due to the lag and ghosting.16 This clearly explains the image profiles, respectively. This signal profile shows that
bowtie case where the reduction in CT number at the skinline CBCT image acquired with a bowtie filter is comparable to
on the right shoulder in Fig. 5共d兲 is due to lag and ghosting16 helical CT. The comparison of CT number accuracy and lin-
共not due to the compatibility of the bowtie filter for an ir- earity for circular phantom, without and with the bowtie fil-
regular shaped phantom兲. The shoulder on the right hand side ter, is shown in Fig. 6共e兲, where the difference of measured
of Fig. 5共d兲 is magnified in Fig. 5共e兲 to illustrate the reduced CT number to CBCT is plotted versus the ideal CT number.
signal at the periphery. The mean reduction in the CT num- The CBCT with bowtie filter demonstrated a clear improve-
ber at the skin region, as defined in Eq. 共3兲, is quantitatively ment in CT number accuracy and an increase in image con-
shown in Fig. 5共f兲 for three different skin depths for both trast compared to the nominal cases. For the nominal case,
cases. The mean signal losses for skin depths of 5, 10, and inaccuracy in CT number is related to the assumption that the
20 mm were found 35.1%, 25.15%, and 20.12%, respec- detected signal is all primary fluence. Scattered fluence
tively, in cases without bowtie filter images. These numbers clearly violates this assumption. Reducing scatter will lead to
in bowtie cases were measured 13.8%, 12.5%, and 11%. more accurate CT numbers by allowing accurate inversion of
The spatial non-uniformities of the irregular phantom
without and with bowtie filter 关Figs. 5共a兲 and 5共b兲兴 were
TABLE III. Comparison of the CT number accuracy and linearity using three
calculated to be 4.1% and 5.7%, respectively. Profiles in Fig.
different techniques in terms of slope, intercept 共at ideal CT# water兲, and R2
5共d兲 show that the CT and CBCT images with the bowtie values.
filter have similar uniformity within the circular phantom
region. Techniques Slope R2 Intercept
MTF
also contributing to improved CT number accuracy兲 through- 0.4
out the image and particularly near the phantom’s periphery.
This reduction in scatter reduces the scatter to primary ratio 0.2
and hence improves CT number accuracy. The CT number
0
accuracies with and without a bowtie filter were found to be
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
⫾21 and ⫾68 HU, respectively.
-1
Central slice images of the irregular phantom with and Line pairs (cm )
without a bowtie filter are shown in Figs. 7共a兲 and 7共b兲,
FIG. 8. Measured MTF performed on irregular phantoms using the CTP528
respectively. These images were then transformed into polar module 共Catphan500兲 plotted as a function of line pairs with and without
coordinates to make the image analysis simple. The trans- bowtie filter.
formed polar coordinate images are shown in Figs. 7共d兲 and
7共e兲. In Fig. 7共f兲, the measured CT number for Catphan
phantom within irregular annulus is plotted versus the ideal
CT number. The measurements performed with a bowtie fil- 共⬃0.1 mGy/exposure兲, the comparison of CNR improves
ter showed greater linear CT number accuracy than nominal. even further, giving a CNR of 4.22⫾ 0.41 for the bowtie,
The mean CT number obtained from a conventional CT im- compared to 1.61⫾ 0.3 without a bowtie.
age showed reasonably good agreement with the expected The central slices of irregular phantom converted into po-
CT numbers. Detailed comparisons of the CT number accu- lar coordinates with and without the bowtie filter are shown
racy and linearity in terms of slope, R2 values, and intercepts in Figs. 7共e兲 and 7共d兲, respectively. The streaking artifacts
are shown in Table III. The slope of the fitting line and in- are more visible around the high-density inserts in the polar
tercept values are reasonably improved. The CT number ac- coordinate image acquired without the bowtie filter. These
curacy for the helical CT and CBCT acquired with a bowtie streaking artifacts appear due to scatter and beam
is higher than the nominal CBCT images. This is because of hardening.17 Beam hardening and scatter effects are worse
the influence of scatter radiation in nominal CBCT, which is because of the large size and irregular shape of the phantom
more severe as compared to that of a fan beam geometry. In and the presence of high contrast objects. The image in Fig.
general, x-ray scatter reduces image contrast, increases im- 7共e兲 acquired with a bowtie filter is almost free of streaking
age noise, and may introduce reconstruction error into artifacts. The scatter compensation reduces streaking arti-
CBCT. facts and improves CNR. The bowtie filter reduces beam
hardening effects by minimizing the range of variation in
x-ray energies presented to the detector. For example, con-
sidering the PA projection of the irregular phantom, the mean
energy of the x-ray beam is 75 keV at the center of the
III.C.3. Contrast-to-noise ratio and streak artifacts detector 共path length 320 mm acrylic兲 and 64 keV near the
CNR measurements were performed on Catphan and ir- periphery 共path length 100 mm acrylic兲. With a bowtie filter,
regular phantoms 共contrast inserts, LDPE and Polystyrene兲. however, the range in energy is reduced to 76 keV at the
For Catphan phantom, the CNR, as defined in Eq. 共4兲, was center and 76 keV at the periphery. Beam-hardening artifacts
measured as 4.51⫾ 0.43 and 3.58⫾ 0.35, with and without a are therefore expected to be mitigated significantly by the
bowtie filter, respectively 共an improvement by a factor of 1.3 bowtie filter.
at fixed mAs兲. The improvement is likely due primarily to
reduced scatter 共with improved beam-hardening and non-
uniformity also contributing to improved CNR兲. The CNR
values for the irregular phantom were found to be III.C.4. Spatial resolution and modulation transfer
4.22⫾ 0.41 and 2.24⫾ 0.32, with and without bowtie cases, function
respectively 共at equivalent mAs兲. The improvement in CNR The spatial resolutions 共for 50% MTF兲 of the circular
is found to be much greater for the irregular than circular phantom’s images acquired with and without a bowtie filter
phantom. A primarily possible approach is that for the with- were measured as 2.3⫾ 0.11 and 2.2⫾ 0.1 lp/ cm, respec-
out bowtie case, the amount of scatter in the irregular phan- tively. The MTF is essentially equivalent with or without a
tom is higher than in the circular phantom, particularly at the bowtie filter, with the curves of Fig. 8 showing consistent
phantom’s peripheries. The CNR in the nominal case is sig- shape between the two cases. For the irregular phantom, the
nificantly reduced for the irregular phantom than for the cir- spatial resolutions 共for 50% MTF兲 were measured as
cular phantom, while this reduction is very small in the case 2.1⫾ 0.08 and 2.0⫾ 0.06 lp/ cm with and without a bowtie,
of the bowtie filter. This is because of the scatter compensa- respectively. The measured MTFs for with and without the
tion. Comparing images acquired at equivalent patient dose bowtie filter have the same values within the error bar.
""
(" ""
$""
"
&"" &%"
45 6789:
!""" !"""
" %" !"" !%" &"" &%" ("" (%" &<$ &'$ (!$ (($
)>)*<*>/ 711: )>)*<*>/ 711:
FIG. 9. CBCT images of gynecological patient 共window level −500 to 500 HU兲 共a兲 without bowtie and 共b兲 with bowtie 共window level −500 to 500 HU兲.
Profiles through the region of interest, indicated by a solid line. 共d兲 A portion of 共c兲, indicated by a rectangular box, is magnified to illustrate signal loss more
clearly at skinline zone.
III.D. Patient study tion of the bowtie filter results in a reduction in dose by 43%
at the skinline and 26% at the phantom center. Assessment of
CBCT images of a gynecological patient acquired without
contrast-to-noise performance demonstrated an improvement
and with a bowtie filter are shown with the same window
when the bowtie filter is employed. This was specifically
level in Figs. 9共a兲 and 9共b兲, respectively. Profiles through the
observed in the large sized phantom 共irregular phantom兲
images are shown in Fig. 9共c兲. Moderate improvements in
where scatter is increased. Overall, the bowtie improves CT
uniformity and skinline reconstruction are seen with the
number accuracy and image uniformity. This improvement is
bowtie filter. Improvement in skinline reconstruction is
attributed to the scatter reduction, beam hardening reduction,
clearly shown in Fig. 9共d兲, which is the magnified portion
and flatness of fluence at the detector.
indicated on the right of Fig. 9共c兲. The black spots in the
The selection/design of a bowtie filter is challenging and
images are a brachytherapy applicator used as a fiducial
will always be less than ideal. It is not likely to be optimum
marker. The image in Fig. 9共a兲 demonstrates less clarity due
given that a subject being imaged is significantly less than
to high scatter-to-primary ratio while the image in Fig. 9共b兲
uniform, not exactly cylindrical in shape, and not necessarily
demonstrates clarity due to reduction in scatter-to-primary
centrally located in the x-ray beam. In such cases, it is pos-
with the bowtie filter.
sible for one or more disjointed regions of saturation to occur
or conversely to over-filter the x-ray flux and unnecessarily
IV. DISCUSSIONS create regions of very low signal. Regardless of compro-
A fixed, shaped filter has been used to selectively attenu- mises associated with patient size, shape, anatomical site,
ate x rays at the periphery of the exposed field-of-view to and field of view, the use of a simple bowtie filter results in
compensate for the patient profile. The filter reduces the dy- an overall improvement in the quality of CBCT images.
namic range demands on the detector during a CBCT scan.
The resulting flux on the detector is relatively uniform across
the detector and does not result in saturation in regions be- V. CONCLUSION
yond the skinline. Further, the reduction of the excessive The implemented bowtie filter shows reduction in scatter-
fluence near the skin zone with a bowtie filter reduces the to-primary ratio for the circular and irregular phantoms. The
absolute scatter signal at the object’s edge. This reduction in bowtie filter shows an improvement in image quality includ-
the absolute scatter signal improves the SPR behind the cen- ing uniformity, CT number accuracy, contrast-to-noise ratio,
ter of the phantom and hence image quality. The influence of and skinline reconstruction of the circular and irregular
the bowtie filter on both dose and image quality was evalu- phantoms. The implementation of a bowtie filer also reduced
ated. The application of the bowtie filter for circular and streaking artifacts in CBCT images of an irregular phantom
irregular phantoms resulted in an improvement in image compared to nominal. The implemented bowtie filter demon-
quality and reduction/alteration in the dose distribution strated an improvement in skinline reconstruction and unifor-
within the patient. Figure 3共b兲 demonstrates that the applica- mity in images of gynecological patients. This compensator
7
is static and makes many compromises for anatomical imag- J. E. Tkaczyk, Y. Du, D. Walter, X. Wu, J. Li, and T. Toth, “Simulation of
CT dose and contrast-to-noise as a function of bowtie shape,” Proc. SPIE
ing site, patient size, and imaged field of view. The ideal
5368, 403–410 共2004兲.
compensator would optimize the fluence profile to account 8
S. Itoh, S. Koyama, M. Ikeda, M. Ozaki, A. Sawaki, S. Iwano, and T.
for numerous properties of the patient and imaging system. Ishigaki, “Further reduction of radiation dose in helical CT for lung can-
The investigated performance of the bowtie filter on image cer screening using small tube current and a newly designed filter,” J.
quality of CBCT will create confidence in clinical implemen- Thorac. Imaging 16, 81–88 共2001兲.
9
S. A. Graham, D. J. Moseley, J. H. Siewerdsen, and D. A. Jaffray, “Com-
tation of bowtie filters.
pensator for dose and scatter management in cone-beam computed to-
a兲
mography,” Med. Phys. 34共7兲, 2691–2703 共2007兲.
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Address for cor- 10
G. H. Glover, “Compton scatter effects in CT reconstructions,” Med.
respondence: Radiation Physics, Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Phys. 9, 860–867 共1982兲.
Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2M9, 11
J. Hsieh, GE Medical Systems Global Technology Co., LLC, “Method
Canada. Telephone: 416-946-4501 X5384; Fax: 416-946-6566; Elec-
and apparatus for optimizing dosage to scan subject,” 2003, U.S. Patent
tronic mail: david.jaffray@rmp.uhn.on.ca
1 No. 6,647,095.
R. Ning, X. Tang, D. Conover, and R. Yu, “Flat panel detector-based cone 12
C. D. Smith, “X-ray filter,” 1940, U.S. Patent No. 2,216,326.
orbit: Preliminary phantom study,” Med. Phys. 30, 1694–1705 共2003兲. 13
2 S. Mori, M. Endo, K. Nishizawa, M. Ohno, H. Miyazaki, K. Tsujita, and
E. Seeram, Computed Tomography: Physical Principles, Clinical Appli-
cations & Quality Control 共Saunders, Philadelphia, 1994兲. Y. Saito, “Prototype heel effect compensation filter cone-beam CT,” Phys.
3
R. Ning, University of Rochester, “Apparatus and method for x-ray scat- Med. Biol. 50, N359–N370 共2005兲.
14
ter reduction and correction for fan beam CT and cone beam volume CT,” R. Boellaard, M. Van Herk, H. Uiterwaal, and B. Mijnheer, “Two-
U.S. Patent No. 6,618,466 共2003兲. dimensional exit dosimetry using a liquid-filled electronic portal imaging
4
H. H. Barrett and W. Swindell, Radiological Imaging: The Theory of device and a convolution model,” Radiother. Oncol. 44, 149–157 共1997兲.
15
Image Formation, detection, and Processing 共Academic, New York, H. E. Johns and J. R. Cunningham, The Physics of Radiology, 4th ed.
1981兲. 共Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1983兲.
5 16
G. X. Ding, D. M. Duggan, and C. W. Coffey, “Characteristics of kilo- N. Mail, D. J. Moseley, J. H. Siewerdsen, and D. A. Jaffray, “An empiri-
voltage x-ray beams used for cone-beam computed tomography in radia- cal method for lag correction in cone-beam ct,” Med. Phys. 35共11兲, 5187–
tion therapy,” Phys. Med. Biol. 52, 1595–1615 共2007兲. 5196 共2008兲.
6 17
R. G. Walters and R. W. Carlson, Technicare Corporation, “Computerized J. H. Siewerdsen and D. A. Jaffray, “Cone-beam computed tomography
tomographic scanner with shaped radiation filter,” 1981. U.S. Patent No. with a flat-panel imager: Magnitude and effects of x-ray scatter,” Med.
4288695. Phys. 28, 共2兲, 220–231 共2001兲.