Improving cone-beam computed tomography image quality for transarterial therapy of liver malignancies: Evaluation of a motion correction algorithm with and without automated bone removal.

Abdul Rehman Mustafa¹, Adham Khalil¹, Arun Kamireddy¹, Dana Angelina Schaar², Fereshteh Khorshidi³, Izzet Altun³, Heyuan Huang⁴, Christopher R Bailey¹, Robert P Liddell¹, Nariman Nezami⁵, Peter Fischer⁶, Alexander Preuhs⁶, Tina Ehtiati⁷, Clifford R Weiss¹

¹Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States.

²Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, United States.

³Department of Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States.

⁴Department of Biomedical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States.

⁵Department of Radiology, Section of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, The Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC, United States.

⁶Department of AT Innovations, Siemens Healthineers AG, Forchheim, Germany.

⁷Department of Research Collaborations, Siemens Medical Solutions Inc., Malvern, PA, United States.

PubMed PMC DOI PDF

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study are to compare the effect on image quality of a motion artifact correction algorithm (CAVAREC) alone versus in combination with an automated bone removal algorithm (ZIBOS) for motion-degraded intraprocedural liver cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective, two-center, Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved s…

Create a free account to keep reading

Free members get 10 full research views every month across publications, clinical trials, FDA clearances, adverse events, and NIH grants. No credit card required.

Create Free Account Sign In

Want unlimited research access? See Pro plans

Data Accuracy Notice: Research intelligence on Health AI Central is aggregated from public sources (PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, FDA, NIH, CMS, and others) and refreshed nightly. Classifications and derived metrics are produced by automated methods described in our Methodology. We recommend verifying critical data points against the primary sources before making decisions.