Asynchronous calibration of a CT scanner for bone mineral density estimation: sources of error and correction

IF 3.4 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM JBMR Plus Pub Date : 2024-07-23 DOI:10.1093/jbmrpl/ziae096
Alice Dudle, Michael Ith, Rainer Egli, Johannes Heverhagen, Yvan Gugler, Christina Wapp, Daniela A Frauchiger, Kurt Lippuner, Christian Jackowski, Philippe Zysset
{"title":"Asynchronous calibration of a CT scanner for bone mineral density estimation: sources of error and correction","authors":"Alice Dudle, Michael Ith, Rainer Egli, Johannes Heverhagen, Yvan Gugler, Christina Wapp, Daniela A Frauchiger, Kurt Lippuner, Christian Jackowski, Philippe Zysset","doi":"10.1093/jbmrpl/ziae096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The estimation of bone mineral density (BMD) with CT scans requires a calibration method, usually based on a phantom. In asynchronous calibration, the phantom is scanned separately from the patient. A standardized acquisition protocol must be used to avoid variations between patient and phantom. However, variations can still be induced, e.g. by temporal fluctuations or patient characteristics. Based on the further use of 739 forensic and 111 clinical CT scans, this study uses the proximal femur BMD value (“total hip”) to assess asynchronous calibration accuracy, using in-scan calibration as ground truth. It identifies the parameters affecting the calibration accuracy and quantifies their impact. For time interval and table height, the impact was measured by calibrating the CT scan twice (once using the phantom scan with closest acquisition parameters and once using a phantom scan with standard values) and comparing the calibration accuracy. For other parameters such as body weight, the impact was measured by computing a linear regression between parameter values and calibration accuracy. Finally, this study proposes correction methods to reduce the effect of these parameters and improve the calibration accuracy. The BMD error of the asynchronous calibration, using the phantom scan with the closest acquisition parameters, was −1.2 ± 1.7% for the forensic and − 1.6 ± 3.5% for the clinical dataset. Among the parameters studied, time interval and body weight were identified as the main sources of error for asynchronous calibration, followed by table height and reconstruction kernel. Based on these results, a correction method was proposed to improve the calibration accuracy.","PeriodicalId":14611,"journal":{"name":"JBMR Plus","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBMR Plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jbmrpl/ziae096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The estimation of bone mineral density (BMD) with CT scans requires a calibration method, usually based on a phantom. In asynchronous calibration, the phantom is scanned separately from the patient. A standardized acquisition protocol must be used to avoid variations between patient and phantom. However, variations can still be induced, e.g. by temporal fluctuations or patient characteristics. Based on the further use of 739 forensic and 111 clinical CT scans, this study uses the proximal femur BMD value (“total hip”) to assess asynchronous calibration accuracy, using in-scan calibration as ground truth. It identifies the parameters affecting the calibration accuracy and quantifies their impact. For time interval and table height, the impact was measured by calibrating the CT scan twice (once using the phantom scan with closest acquisition parameters and once using a phantom scan with standard values) and comparing the calibration accuracy. For other parameters such as body weight, the impact was measured by computing a linear regression between parameter values and calibration accuracy. Finally, this study proposes correction methods to reduce the effect of these parameters and improve the calibration accuracy. The BMD error of the asynchronous calibration, using the phantom scan with the closest acquisition parameters, was −1.2 ± 1.7% for the forensic and − 1.6 ± 3.5% for the clinical dataset. Among the parameters studied, time interval and body weight were identified as the main sources of error for asynchronous calibration, followed by table height and reconstruction kernel. Based on these results, a correction method was proposed to improve the calibration accuracy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
用于骨矿物质密度估算的 CT 扫描仪异步校准:误差来源与纠正
利用 CT 扫描估算骨矿物质密度 (BMD) 需要一种校准方法,通常以模型为基础。在异步校准中,模型与患者分开扫描。必须使用标准化的采集协议来避免患者和模型之间的差异。然而,时间波动或患者特征等因素仍可能导致差异。在进一步使用 739 份法医和 111 份临床 CT 扫描的基础上,本研究使用股骨近端 BMD 值("全髋")来评估异步校准的准确性,并将扫描内校准作为基本真相。研究确定了影响校准精度的参数,并量化了其影响。对于时间间隔和工作台高度的影响,测量方法是校准两次 CT 扫描(一次使用最接近采集参数的模型扫描,另一次使用标准值的模型扫描)并比较校准精度。对于体重等其他参数,则通过计算参数值与校准精度之间的线性回归来测量其影响。最后,本研究提出了校正方法,以减少这些参数的影响并提高校准精度。使用采集参数最接近的模型扫描进行异步校准,法医数据集的 BMD 误差为-1.2 ± 1.7%,临床数据集的 BMD 误差为-1.6 ± 3.5%。在所研究的参数中,时间间隔和体重被确定为异步校准的主要误差来源,其次是台面高度和重建内核。根据这些结果,提出了一种校正方法来提高校准精度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
JBMR Plus
JBMR Plus Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.60%
发文量
103
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the relationship between glycemic control and bone fragility within the UK Biobank: observational and one-sample Mendelian randomization analyses. Correction to: Prevalence and risk factors for atypical femoral fracture among Lebanese patients with hip and shaft fractures. In nondiabetic C57BL/6J mice, canagliflozin affects the skeleton in a sex- and age-dependent manner. Genotype-phenotype correlations in 294 pediatric patients with osteogenesis imperfecta. Prevalence of chondrocalcinosis and calcium pyrophosphate deposition disease in a cohort of adult patients with low alkaline phosphatase levels and a positive versus negative genetic ALPL study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1