2021
DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ac27b6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A convolutional neural network for estimating cone-beam CT intensity deviations from virtual CT projections

Abstract: Extending cone-beam CT (CBCT) use toward dose accumulation and adaptive radiotherapy (ART) necessitates more accurate HU reproduction since cone-beam geometries are heavily degraded by photon scatter. This study proposes a novel method which aims to demonstrate how deep learning based on phantom data can be used effectively for CBCT intensity correction in patient images. Four anthropomorphic phantoms were scanned on a CBCT and conventional fan-beam CT system. Intensity correction is performed by estimating th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These authors also investigated the use of MSE and MAE loss functions, with Lalonde et al 80 . and Rusanov et al 81 . both reporting an improved MAE for the latter loss (13.41 vs. 15.48 HU and 74 vs. 86 HU, respectively).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…These authors also investigated the use of MSE and MAE loss functions, with Lalonde et al 80 . and Rusanov et al 81 . both reporting an improved MAE for the latter loss (13.41 vs. 15.48 HU and 74 vs. 86 HU, respectively).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rusanov et al 81 in their scatter correction study (74 vs. 77 HU). These authors also investigated the use of MSE and MAE loss functions, with Lalonde et al 80 and Rusanov et al 81 both reporting an improved MAE for the latter loss (13.41 vs. 15.48 HU and 74 vs. 86 HU, respectively). Nomura et al concluded that MAE penalized anatomic regions more than MSE, which tended to penalize noisy regions primarily in air, thereby leading to more inaccurate scatter correction in anatomic regions.…”
Section: ] -mentioning
confidence: 96%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Moreover, it was not validated on real‐patient data, whose distribution of scattering signals may be more complex than the phantom data 16–18 . Finally, Rusanov proposed to correct the projections by training a U‐Net with the digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) of phantoms 17 . But, the relation between CBCT projections and DRRs for real patients may be more complicated than the phantoms 33–36 …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…U-Net is used for training by pairing CT and CBCT images, which requires a high registration accuracy between CBCT and CT images; it is usually used in head-and-neck sCT generation. [14][15][16] Rusanov 17 and Landry 18 trained U-Net in a projection domain to correct CBCT projection and then obtained sCT images through Feldkamp-Davis-Kress (FDK) reconstruction from the corrected projection. Wu 19 proposed an sCT generation method using multiresolution neural networks, in which a large number of low-resolution images are used to train the network to obtain a preliminary model and then final sCT images are generated by fine-tuning the coarse model using a fewer number of high-resolution images.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%