Evaluation of Low-Dose CT Perfusion for the Liver using Reconstruction of Difference

Saeed Seyyedi, Eleni Liapi, Tobias Lasser, Robert Ivkov, Rajeev Hatwar, J. Webster Stayman


Published in:Fully3D 2017 Proceedings


low-dose CT, prior-image-based reconstruction, sequential imaging
CT perfusion imaging of the liver enables the evaluation of perfusion metrics that can reveal hepatic diseases and that can be used to assess treatment responses. However, x-ray radiation dose limits more widespread adoption of liver CT perfusion studies as a diagnostic tool. In this work we assess a model-based reconstruction method called Reconstruction of Difference (RoD) for use in low-dose CT perfusion of the liver. The RoD approach integrates a baseline non-contrast-enhanced scan into the reconstruction objective to improve image volumes formed from low-exposure data. Simulation studies were conducted using a digital human liver phantom based on segmented anthropomorphic CT images and time-attenuation curves derived from CT perfusion studies in a rabbit model. We compare the RoD method with standard FBP and penalized-likelihood reconstructions through an evaluation of individual image volumes in the low-dose en-hanced liver volume sequence as well as in an evaluation of perfusion maps. Specific perfusion metrics include hepatic arterial per-fusion (HAP), hepatic portal perfusion (HPP) and perfusion index (PI) parameters computed using the dual-input maximum slope method (SM). The quantitative and qualitative comparisons of reconstructed images and perfusion maps shows that the RoD approach can significantly reduce noise in low-dose acquisitions while maintaining accurate hepatic perfusion maps as compared with traditional reconstruction methods.
Saeed Seyyedi
Technical University of Munich
Eleni Liapi
Johns Hopkins University
Tobias Lasser
Technical University of Munich
Robert Ivkov
Johns Hopkins University
Rajeev Hatwar
Johns Hopkins University
J. Webster Stayman
Johns Hopkins University
  1. K. A. Miles, T. Y. Lee, V. Goh, E. Klotz, C. Cuenod, S. Bisdas, A. M. Groves, M. P. Hayball, R. Alonzi, and T. Brunner, “Current status and guidelines for the assessment of tumour vascular support with dynamic contrast-enhanced computed tomography,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1430–1441, 2012.
  2. S. H. Kim, A. Kamaya, and J. K. Willmann, “CT Perfusion of the Liver: Principles and Applications in Oncology.,” Radiology, vol. 272, no. 2, pp. 322–44, 2014.
  3. D. V. Sahani, N.-S. Holalkere, P. R. Mueller, and A. X. Zhu, “Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: CT Perfusion of Liver and Tumor Tissue—Initial Experience 1,” Radiology, vol. 243, no. 3, pp. 736–743, Jun. 2007.
  4. E. Liapi, M. Mahesh, and D. V. Sahani, “Is CT perfusion ready for liver cancer treatment evaluation?,” J. Am. Coll. Radiol., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 111–113, 2015.
  5. P. V Pandharipande, G. A. Krinsky, H. Rusinek, and V. S. Lee, “Perfusion Imaging of the Liver: Current Challenges and Future Goals,” Radiology, vol. 234, no. 3, pp. 661–673, 2005.
  6. M. Okada, T. Kim, and T. Murakami, “Hepatocellular nodules in liver cirrhosis: State of the art CT evaluation (perfusion CT/volume helical shuttle scan/dual-energy CT, etc.),” Abdom. Imaging, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 273–281, 2011.
  7. A. K. Hara, R. G. Paden, A. C. Silva, J. L. Kujak, H. J. Lawder, and W. Pavlicek, “Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study.,” AJR. Am. J. Roentgenol., vol. 193, no. 3, pp. 764–71, Sep. 2009.
  8. N. Negi, T. Yoshikawa, Y. Ohno, Y. Somiya, T. Sekitani, N. Sugihara, H. Koyama, T. Kanda, N. Kanata, T. Murakami, H. Kawamitsu, and K. Sugimura, “Hepatic CT perfusion measurements: a feasibility study for radiation dose reduction using new image reconstruction method.,” Eur. J. Radiol., vol. 81, no. 11, pp. 3048–54, Nov. 2012.
  9. G.-H. Chen, J. Tang, and S. Leng, “Prior image constrained compressed sensing (PICCS): a method to accurately reconstruct dynamic CT images from highly undersampled projection data sets.,” Med. Phys., vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 660–3, Mar. 2008.
  10. J. W. Stayman, H. Dang, Y. Ding, and J. H. Siewerdsen, “PIRPLE: a penalized-likelihood framework for incorporation of prior images in CT reconstruction.,” Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 58, no. 21, pp. 7563–82, Nov. 2013. 
  11. B. E. Nett, R. Brauweiler, W. Kalender, H. Rowley, and G.-H. Chen, “Perfusion measurements by micro-CT using prior image constrained compressed sensing (PICCS): initial phantom results,” Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 2333–2350, Apr. 2010.
  12. H. Dang, A. S. Wang, M. S. Sussman, J. H. Siewerdsen, and J. W. Stayman, “dPIRPLE: a joint estimation framework for deformable registration and penalized-likelihood CT image reconstruction using prior images.,” Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 59, no. 17, pp. 4799–826, Sep. 2014.
  13. A. Pourmorteza, H. Dang, J. H. Siewerdsen, and J. W. Stayman, “Reconstruction of difference in sequential CT studies using penalized likelihood estimation.,” Phys. Med. Biol., vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 1986–2002, Mar. 2016.
  14. K. A. Miles, M. P. Hayball, and A. K. Dixon, “Functional images of hepatic perfusion obtained with dynamic CT.,” Radiology, vol. 188, no. 2, pp. 405–411, Aug. 1993.
  15. J. A. Fessler, “Statistical image reconstruction methods for transmission tomography,” Med. Image Process. Anal., vol. 3, pp. 1–70, 2000.