Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Comparison of CT scatter rejection effectiveness using antiscatter grids and energy-discriminating detectors
Author(s): Erica M. Cherry; Rebecca Fahrig
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

A potential application for energy-discriminating detectors (EDD) is scatter rejection in CT. If paired with a monoenergetic source, EDDs can identify scattered photons by their reduced energy relative to primary photons. However, it is unknown how the scatter rejection of an EDD compares with that of an antiscatter grid. In this study, the scatter rejection efficiency of energy-integrating detectors (EIDs) with antiscatter grids was compared with that of EDDs. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to generate projection images of head and body-sized cylindrical water phantoms in a typical clinical CT scanner geometry and a non-traditional geometry in which antiscatter grids would be impossible to install. Eight different detectors were used: four EIDs with 1D antiscatter grids of different heights (between 1 mm and 20 mm) and four EDDs with different energy bin sizes (between 0.1 keV and 10 keV.) Different source energy spectra were also investigated. Scatter to primary ratio (SPR) was calculated for each setup. The results showed that most antiscatter grid setups outperformed EDD setups. In the traditional CT geometry, the EDD with a 0.1 keV energy bin size produced slightly better SPR than a 5-mm-tall antiscatter grid, but the more realistic 1 keV energy bin EDD outperformed only a 1-mm-tall grid. However, the EDDs significantly reduced the SPR in the non-traditional geometry in which it was impossible to install antiscatter grids. The results suggest that EDDs are unlikely to outperform antiscatter grids in scatter rejection but could be useful when antiscatter grids are impossible to install.

Paper Details

Date Published: 18 March 2015
PDF: 7 pages
Proc. SPIE 9412, Medical Imaging 2015: Physics of Medical Imaging, 94123Y (18 March 2015); doi: 10.1117/12.2081538
Show Author Affiliations
Erica M. Cherry, Stanford Univ. (United States)
Rebecca Fahrig, Stanford Univ. (United States)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 9412:
Medical Imaging 2015: Physics of Medical Imaging
Christoph Hoeschen; Despina Kontos, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top