1. bookTom 28 (2022): Zeszyt 3 (September 2022)
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
1898-0309
Pierwsze wydanie
30 Dec 2008
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski
Otwarty dostęp

Automation of slice thickness measurements in computed tomography images of AAPM CT performance phantom using a non-rotational method

Data publikacji: 23 Aug 2022
Tom & Zeszyt: Tom 28 (2022) - Zeszyt 3 (September 2022)
Zakres stron: 133 - 138
Otrzymano: 12 May 2022
Przyjęty: 21 Jul 2022
Informacje o czasopiśmie
License
Format
Czasopismo
eISSN
1898-0309
Pierwsze wydanie
30 Dec 2008
Częstotliwość wydawania
4 razy w roku
Języki
Angielski

1. Kalender WA. X-ray computed tomography. Phys Med Biol. 2006;51(13):R29-R43. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/51/13/r03 Search in Google Scholar

2. Aweda MA, Arogundade RA. Patient dose reduction methods in computerized tomography procedures: A review. Int J Phys Sci. 2007;2(1):1-9.10.9734/PSIJ/2017/30833 Search in Google Scholar

3. Anam C, Budi WS, Haryanto F, Fujibuchi T, Dougherty G. A novel multiple-windows blending of CT images in red-green-blue (RGB) color space: Phantoms study. Scientific Visualization. 2019;11(5):56-69. https://doi.org/10.26583/sv.11.5.06 Search in Google Scholar

4. Mansour Z, Mokhtar A, Sarhan A, Ahmed MT, El-Diasty T. Quality control of CT image using American College of Radiology (ACR) phantom. The Egyptian Journal of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine. 2016;47(4):1665-1671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrnm.2016.08.016 Search in Google Scholar

5. Elnour H, Hassan HA, Mustafa A, Osman H, Alamri S, Yasen A. Assessment of Image Quality Parameters for Computed Tomography in Sudan. Open Journal of Radiology. 2017;7(1):75-84. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2017.71009 Search in Google Scholar

6. Ford JM, Decker SJ. Computed tomography slice thickness and its effects on three dimensional reconstruction of anatomical structures. Journal of Forensic Radiology and Imaging. 2016;4:43-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jofri.2015.10.004 Search in Google Scholar

7. Vermiglio G, Acri G, Testagrossa B, Causa F, Tripepi M. Procedures for evaluation of slice thickness in medical imaging systems. In: Eldin AB, editor. Modern Approaches To Quality Control. IntechOpen, London; 2011:383-404. https://doi.org/10.5772/23693 Search in Google Scholar

8. Makmur IWA, Setiabudi W, Anam C. Evaluasi ketebalan irisan (slice thickness) pada pesawat CT-scan single slice. Jurnal Sains dan Matematika. 2013;21:42-47. Search in Google Scholar

9. Morsbach F, Zhang YH, Martin L, Lindqvist C, Brismar T. Body composition evaluation with computed tomography: Contrast media and slice thickness cause methodological errors. Nutrition. 2019;59:50-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nut.2018.08.00130419500 Search in Google Scholar

10. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, McNitt-Gray MF, et al. The phantom portion of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Computed Tomography (CT) accreditation program. Practical tips, artifact, example, and pitfalls to avoid. Med Phys 2004;31(9):2423-2442. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.176963215487722 Search in Google Scholar

11. An HJ, Son J, Jin H, Sung J, Chun M. Acceptance test and clinical commissioning of CT simulator. Progress in Medical Physics. 2019;30(4):160-166. https://doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2019.30.4.160 Search in Google Scholar

12. Husby E, Svendsen ED, Andersen HK, Martinsen ACT. 100 days with scans of the same Catphan phantom on the same CT scanner. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18(6):224-231. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12186568991428921910 Search in Google Scholar

13. Sofiyatun S, Anam C, Zahro UM, Rukmana DA, Dougherty G. An automated measurement of image slice thickness of computed tomography. Atom Indonesia. 2021;47(2):121-128. https://doi.org/10.17146/aij.2021.1111 Search in Google Scholar

14. Lasiyah N, Anam C, Hidayanto E, Dougherty G. Automated procedure for slice thickness verification of computed tomography images: Variations of slice thickness, position from iso-center and reconstruction filter. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021;22(7):313-321. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13317829268734109738 Search in Google Scholar

15. Widyanti ER, Anam C, Hidayanto E, Haekal M. The impact of noise on the results of automated slice sensitivity profile measurements in computed tomography. International Journal of Progressive Sciences and Technologies. 2021;26(2):657-663. https://doi.org/10.52155/ijpsat.v26.2.3110 Search in Google Scholar

16. Anam C. Types of statistical tests for analysis of research results. Berkala Fisika. 23(4):115-117. Search in Google Scholar

17. Sunardi H, Zulkifli Z, Antony F. Geometric transformation of rotation of digital imagery to obtain optimal compression using lossless and lossy methods (In Bahasa Indonesia). Jurnal Informatika Global. 2021;12(1):15-22. Search in Google Scholar

18. International Atomic Energy Agency. Quality assurance programme for computed tomography: Diagnostic and therapy applications, IAEA-Human health series No. 19. IAEA, Vienna; 2012. Search in Google Scholar

19. Greene TC, Rong XJ. Evaluation of techniques for slice sensitivity profile measurement and analysis. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014;15(2):281-294. https://doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i2.4042587547524710429 Search in Google Scholar

Polecane artykuły z Trend MD

Zaplanuj zdalną konferencję ze Sciendo