skip to main content
10.1145/3548636.3548641acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesitccConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Quality Changes of Image from Total Variation to Nonlinear Sparsifying Transform for Sparse-view CT Reconstruction

Authors Info & Claims
Published:23 August 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

Sparse-view CT has been widely studied as an effective strategy for reducing radiation dose to patients. Total variation (TV) minimization, which is most extensively studied among the existing compressed sensing (CS) techniques, has been recognized as a powerful tool for dealing with the inverse problem of sparse-view image reconstruction. However, in recent years, the drawbacks of TV are being increasingly reported, such as appearance of patchy artifacts, depict of incorrect object boundaries, and loss in image textures. In order to address these drawbacks, a series of advanced algorithms using nonlinear sparsifying transform (NLST) have been proposed very recently. The NLST-based CS is based on a different framework from the TV, and it achieves an improvement in image quality. Since it is a relatively newly proposed idea, within the scope of our knowledge, there exist few literatures that discusses comprehensively how the image quality improvement occurs in comparison with the conventional TV method. In this study, we investigated the image quality differences between the conventional TV minimization and the NLST-based CS, as well as image quality differences among different kinds of NLST-based CS algorithms in the sparse-view CT image reconstruction. More specifically, image reconstructions of actual CT images of different body parts were carried out to demonstrate the image quality differences. Through comparative experiments, we conclude that the NLST-based CS method is superior to the TV method in the task of image reconstruction for sparse-view CT.

References

  1. Matsunaga, Y., Chida, K., Kondo, Y., Kobayashi, K., Kobayashi, M., Minami, K., ... & Asada, Y. 2019. Diagnostic reference levels and achievable doses for common computed tomography examinations: results from the Japanese nationwide dose survey. The British journal of radiology, 92(1094), 20180290.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Brenner, D.J., Hall, E.J., 2007. CT-an increasing source of radiation exposure. New England J Med. 357, 2277-2284.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. McCollough C., Primark A., Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L, 2009. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin North Am. 47:27-40.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Li, L. L., Wang, H., Song, J., Shang, J., Zhao, X. Y., & Liu, B. 2021. A feasibility study of realizing low-dose abdominal CT using deep learning image reconstruction algorithm. Journal of X-ray Science and Technology, (Preprint), 1-12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Dong J, Kudo H, Kim Y. 2020. Accelerated algorithm for the classical SIRT method in CT image Reconstruction. Proc. of ICMIP 2020. 49-55.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Louis AK.1981. Ghosts in tomography-The null space of the Radon transform. Math Methods Appl Sci.3:1–10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Smith KT, Solmon DC, Wagner SL.1977. Practical and mathematical aspects of the problem of reconstructing objects from radiographs. Bull Amer Math Soc. 83:1227–1270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Donoho, D.L., 2006. Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory. 52, 1289-1306.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Candès, E.J., Romberg, J., Tao, T., 2006. Robust uncertainty principles: Exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Trans Inf Theory. 52, 489-509.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Rudin, L.I., Osher, S., Fatemi, E., 1992. Nonlinear total variation noise removal algorithm. Physica D. 60, 259-68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Song J, Liu Q., Johnson G., Badea C.. 2007. Sparseness prior based iterative image reconstruction for retrospectively gated cardiac micro-CT. Med Phys.34:4476–4483.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Sidky E, Pan X. 2008. Image reconstruction in circular cone-beam ct by constrained, total-variation minimization. Phys Med Biol. 53:4777–4807.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Kudo H, Dong J, Kamo K, Horii N, Furukawa H, 2016. Tomographic image reconstruction using compressed sensing. Kenbikyo. 51:48–53.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhang H, Ma J, Wang J, 2014. Statistical image reconstruction for low-dose CT using nonlocal means-based regularization. Comput Med Imaging Graph. 38:423–435.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Dong J, Ding Y, Kudo H. 2021. Nonlinear Filtered Compressed Sensing Applied on Image De-noising. Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Multimedia and Image Processing, 1-6. https: //doi.org/10.1145/3449388.3449390Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Elad M. 2010. Sparse and Redundant Representations: From Theory to Applications in Signal and Image Processing. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Chambolle, A., 2004. An algorithm for total variation minimization and applications. J.Math.Imaging Vis. 20, 89-97.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Dong, J., Kudo, H., 2016. Proposal of Compressed sensing using nonlinear sparsifying transform for CT image reconstruction. Med Imag Tech. 34, 235-244.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Huang, J., Zhang, Y., Ma, J., Zeng, D., 2013. Iterative Image Reconstruction for Sparse-View CT Using Normal-Dose Image Induced Total Variation Prior. PLoS ONE. 8(11), e79709. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0079709.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  1. Quality Changes of Image from Total Variation to Nonlinear Sparsifying Transform for Sparse-view CT Reconstruction

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ITCC '22: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information Technology and Computer Communications
        June 2022
        138 pages
        ISBN:9781450396820
        DOI:10.1145/3548636

        Copyright © 2022 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 23 August 2022

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      HTML Format

      View this article in HTML Format .

      View HTML Format