AJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Compression Artifacts
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kim, B.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, Y. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kim, B.
Right arrow Articles by Kim, Y. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Hotlight (NEW!)
Right arrow
What's Hotlight?

Artifacts in Slab Average-Intensity-Projection Images Reformatted from JPEG 2000 Compressed Thin-Section Abdominal CT Data Sets

Bohyoung Kim1, Kyoung Ho Lee1, Kil Joong Kim1, Rafal Mantiuk2, Hye-ri Kim1 and Young Hoon Kim1

1 Seoul National University College of Medicine, Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Korea; and Department of Radiology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 300 Gumi-dong, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggido, 463-707, Korea.
2 Max-Planck-Institut für Informatik, Department 4, Computer Graphics Bldg. 46.1, Rm. 227, Stuhlsatzenhausweg 85, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany.


Figure 1
View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 1 —Acquisition of matching thin-section, thick-section, and average-intensity-projection (AIP) images and their compressed versions. Horizontal lines represent transverse images, forming a stack of contiguous sections. Thick and thin lines represent 5- and 0.67-mm-thick images, respectively. Black lines represent selected images that were included in final study sample.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2A —Scatterplots of peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and High Dynamic Range Visual Difference Predictor (HDR-VDP) results. Scatterplots of PSNR (A) and HDR-VDP results (B) at each compression level. Symbols {circ};, x, and {Delta} represent average-intensity-projection (AIP), thin-section, and thick-section images, respectively.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 2B —Scatterplots of peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR) and High Dynamic Range Visual Difference Predictor (HDR-VDP) results. Scatterplots of PSNR (A) and HDR-VDP results (B) at each compression level. Symbols {circ}, x, and {Delta} represent average-intensity-projection (AIP), thin-section, and thick-section images, respectively.

 

Figure 4
View larger version (151K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 3 —Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) 2000 compression artifacts in transverse average-intensity-projection (AIP) (left column), thin-section (middle column), and thick-section (right column) abdominal CT images in 45-year-old man with acute appendicitis (arrow). (See also Figs. S3A-S3F in supplemental data online.) Compared with original images (top row), artifacts increase in order of AIP, thick-section, and thin-section images in 15:1 compressed versions (second row), especially in periappendiceal fat stranding (arrowheads) and abdominal wall (circle). Subtraction images (third row) and High Dynamic Range Visual Difference Predictor (HDR-VDP) maps (bottom row) represent compression artifacts measured mathematically and simulated-perceptually, respectively. Note that original thin-section image is too noisy to be used in primary interpretation.

 

Figure 5
View larger version (151K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 4 —Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) 2000 compression artifacts in transverse average-intensity-projection (AIP) (left column), thin-section (middle column), and thick-section (right column) abdominal CT images in 70-year-old man with liver cirrhosis. (See also Figs. S4A-S4F in supplemental data online.) Compared with original images (top row), artifacts increase in order of AIP, thick-section, and thin-section images in 15:1 compressed versions (second row), altering texture of liver (L) and ascites (A). Subtraction images (third row) and High Dynamic Range Visual Difference Predictor (HDR-VDP) maps (bottom row) represent compression artifacts measured mathematically and simulated-perceptually, respectively. Note that original thin-section image is too noisy to be used in primary interpretation.

 

Figure 6
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 5A —Grading responses of three readers. Grading responses of reader 1 (A), reader 2 (B), and reader 3 (C). Three bars at each compression level represent average-intensity-projection (AIP) (left), thin-section (middle), and thick-section (right) images. Each gray shade indicates different grade for artifacts: white = grade 0, light gray = grade 1, dark gray = grade 2, and black = grade 3.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 5B —Grading responses of three readers. Grading responses of reader 1 (A), reader 2 (B), and reader 3 (C). Three bars at each compression level represent average-intensity-projection (AIP) (left), thin-section (middle), and thick-section (right) images. Each gray shade indicates different grade for artifacts: white = grade 0, light gray = grade 1, dark gray = grade 2, and black = grade 3.

 

Figure 8
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[as a PowerPoint slide]
  		Fig. 5C —Grading responses of three readers. Grading responses of reader 1 (A), reader 2 (B), and reader 3 (C). Three bars at each compression level represent average-intensity-projection (AIP) (left), thin-section (middle), and thick-section (right) images. Each gray shade indicates different grade for artifacts: white = grade 0, light gray = grade 1, dark gray = grade 2, and black = grade 3.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2008 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.