By Topic

Longitudinal aliasing in multislice helical computed tomography: sampling and cone-beam effects

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

2 Author(s)
La Riviere, P.J. ; Dept. of Radiol., Univ. of Chicago, IL, USA ; Xiaochuan Pan

In this study, we examine longitudinal aliasing properties in multislice helical computed tomography (CT) volumes reconstructed under the multiple parallel fanbeam approximation by use of a 180LI-type algorithm. We focus on the differences between the multislice case and the single-slice case, which has been studied previously. Specifically, we examine longitudinal aliasing properties in four-slice scanners for helical pitches 3 and 6, which are sometimes called "preferred" in four-slice helical CT, because it is believed that the effective longitudinal sampling intervals at these pitches are equivalent to those in single-slice helical CT operating at pitches 1 and 2, respectively. While these equivalences have been supported by comparative studies of slice-sensitivity profiles in single- and multislice helical CT, artifacts have been observed in pitch-3 and pitch-6 multislice images that were not evident in their purported single-slice counterparts. We attribute these differences to aliasing arising in the multislice reconstructions that is not present in the single-slice counterparts. We find that the aliasing has two principal origins: sampling effects similar to those in the single-slice case and cone-beam effects. The difference between the multislice, pitch-3 and single-slice, pitch-1 results is attributed to the small cone angle in multislice helical CT, which introduces inconsistencies among the measurements of different detector rows. The difference between multislice, pitch-6 and single-slice, pitch-2 results is attributed to a combination of the cone angle and genuine differences in sampling patterns. It is argued, however, that the lack of strict equivalence with single-slice counterparts does not necessarily undermine the claim that pitches 3 and 6 are "preferred" relative to other pitches in multislice helical CT.

Published in:

Medical Imaging, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:21 ,  Issue: 11 )