1571. Artifacts in computer tomography imaging: how it can really affect diagnostic image quality and confuse clinical diagnosis?

Vincentas Veikutis1, Tomas Budrys2, Algidas Basevicius3, Saulius Lukosevicius4, Rymante Gleizniene5, Ramunas Unikas6, Darijus Skaudickas7

1Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Institute of Cardiology, Kaunas, Lithuania

2, 3, 4, 5Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Clinical Hospital,
Department of Radiology, Kaunas, Lithuania

6Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Clinical Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Kaunas, Lithuania

7Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Clinical Hospital, Department of Urology, Kaunas, Lithuania

1Corresponding author

E-mail: 1vincentas.veikutis@lsmuni.lt, 2tomas.budrys@yahoo.com, 3algidas.basevicius@kmuk.lt, 4saulius.lukosevicius@kaunoklinikos.lt, 5rymangleiz@gmail.com, 6ramunas.unikas@kaunoklinikos.lt, 7darijusskaudickas@gmail.com

(Received 11 February 2015; received in revised form 15 March 2015; accepted 25 March 2015)

Abstract. Different kinds of artifacts can occur during a computer tomography (CT) scans due to hardware or software related problems, human physiologic phenomenon or physical restrictions. Some of them can seriously affecting diagnostic image quality, while others may simulate or be confused with different pathology. On another words artifact is an artificial feature appearing in an image that is not present in the original investigative object. It is important to recognize these artifacts according to a basic understanding of their origin, especially those mimicking pathology, as they can lead to incorrect diagnosis and cause serious after-effects on patientís health. We presented an overview of the most common CT artifacts and methods to fix or rectify them. We also provide the original artifacts images and statistics from the Lithuanian University of Health Sciences Kaunas Clinical Hospital obtained from image databases.

Keywords: artifact, computer tomography, beam hardening, under sampling, correction.

References

[1]        Julia F. Barrett, Nicholas Keat Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. RadioGraphics, Vol. 24, 2004, p. 1679‑1691.

[2]        F. Edward Boas, Dominik Fleischmann CT artifacts: causes and reduction techniques. Imaging in Medicine, Vol. 4, Issue 2, 2012, p. 229-240.

[3]        Barrett J. F., Keat N., Platten D., Lewis M. A., Edyvean S. Cardiac CT scanning. MHRA Report 03076. London, England: Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, 2003.

[4]        Issa Al-Shakhrah, Tariq Al-Obaidi Common artifacts in computerized tomography: a review. Applied Radiology, 2003.

[5]        Kachelriess M., Watzke O., Kalender W. A. Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral single-slice, multi-slice, and cone-beam CT. Medical Physics, Vol. 28, 2001, p. 475‑490.

[6]        Hsieh J. Image artifacts: appearances, causes and corrections. Computed Tomography: Principles, Design, Artifacts and Recent Advances, SPIE Press, Bellingham, Wash, 2003, p. 167‑240.

[7]        Taguchi K., Aradate H. Algorithm for image reconstruction in multi-slice helical CT. Medical Physics, Vol. 25, 1998, p. 550‑561.

[8]        Seeram E. Image quality. Computed Tomography: Physical Principles, Clinical Applications and Quality Control. 2nd Ed. Philadelphia, Saunders, 2001, p. 174‑199.

[9]        Wilting J. E., Timmer J. Artifacts in spiral-CT images and their relation to pitch and subject morphology. European Radiology, Vol. 9, 1999, p. 316‑322.

Cite this article

Veikutis Vincentas, Budrys Tomas, Basevicius Algidas, Lukosevicius Saulius, Gleizniene Rymante, Unikas Ramunas, Skaudickas Darijus Artifacts in computer tomography imaging: how it can really affect diagnostic image quality and confuse clinical diagnosis?. Journal of Vibroengineering, Vol. 17, Issue 2, 2015, p. 995‑1003.

 

© JVE International Ltd. Journal of Vibroengineering. Mar 2015, Volume 17, Issue 2. ISSN 1392-8716