| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Original Research |
1 Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 300
Gumi-dong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Seoul 463-707, Korea.
2 Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research
Center, Seoul, Korea.
3 Medical Research Collaborating Center, Seoul National University Hospital,
Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of our study was to compare the tolerance of Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) 2000 compression between thin- and thick-section abdominal CT images.
MATERIALS AND METHODS. One hundred 0.67-mm-thick and corresponding 5-mm-thick images were compressed to four different levels: reversible and irreversible 6:1, 10:1, and 15:1. Five radiologists determined if the compressed images were distinguishable from the originals. The percentage of distinguishable pairs and peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) were compared between the thin and thick sections. The visually lossless threshold was estimated by comparing the percentages of the distinguishable pairs between each irreversible compression and the reversible compression. Paired Student's t tests and exact tests for paired proportions were used.
RESULTS. Thin sections had smaller PSNRs at each compression level (p < 0.001). According to the pooled responses, the percentages of distinguishable pairs for the thin and thick sections, respectively, were 0% (0/100) and 0% at reversible compression, 27% and 0% at 6:1 (p < 0.001), 100% and 80% at 10:1 (p < 0.001), and 100% and 100% at 15:1. Artifacts increased significantly (p < 0.001) at 6:1 or more for the thin sections and at 10:1 and 15:1 for the thick sections, indicating that the visually lossless thresholds were below 6:1 and between 6:1 and 10:1, respectively.
CONCLUSION. Thin-section abdominal CT images are less tolerant of compression, and a lower compression level should be used for the visually lossless threshold.
Keywords: CT • data compression • JPEG 2000 • visually lossless threshold
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. J. Kim, B. Kim, K. H. Lee, T. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-S. Kang, and Y. H. Kim Regional Difference in Compression Artifacts in Low-Dose Chest CT Images: Effects of Mathematical and Perceptual Factors Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W30 - W37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Bajpai, K. H. Lee, B. Kim, K. J. Kim, T. J. Kim, Y. H. Kim, and H. S. Kang Differences in Compression Artifacts on Thin- and Thick-Section Lung CT Images Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W38 - W43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Ringl, R. Schernthaner, E. Sala, K. El-Rabadi, M. Weber, W. Schima, C. J. Herold, and A. K. Dixon Lossy 3D JPEG2000 Compression of Abdominal CT Images in Patients with Acute Abdominal Complaints: Effect of Compression Ratio on Diagnostic Confidence and Accuracy Radiology, August 1, 2008; 248(2): 476 - 484. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-r. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Artifacts in Slab Average-Intensity-Projection Images Reformatted from JPEG 2000 Compressed Thin-Section Abdominal CT Data Sets Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2008; 190(6): W342 - W350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, S. Hahn, T. J. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Prediction of Perceptible Artifacts in JPEG 2000 Compressed Chest CT Images Using Mathematical and Perceptual Quality Metrics Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 328 - 334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
