Quick search Find article
Quick search
Find article

A comparison of x-ray detectors for mouse CT imaging

Andrew L Goertzen1,2, Vivek Nagarkar3, Robert A Street4, Michael J Paulus5, John M Boone1,6 and Simon R Cherry1

Show affiliations


There is significant interest in using computed tomography (CT) for in vivo imaging applications in mouse models of disease. Most commercially available mouse x-ray CT scanners utilize a charge-coupled device (CCD) detector coupled via fibre optic taper to a phosphor screen. However, there has been little research to determine if this is the optimum detector for the specific task of in vivo mouse imaging. To investigate this issue, we have evaluated four detectors, including an amorphous selenium (a-Se) detector, an amorphous silicon (a-Si) detector with a gadolinium oxysulphide (GOS) screen, a CCD with a 3:1 fibre taper and a GOS screen, and a CCD with a 2:1 fibre taper and both GOS and thallium-doped caesium iodide (CsI:Tl) screens. The detectors were evaluated by measuring the modulation transfer function (MTF), noise power spectrum (NPS), detective quantum efficiency (DQE), stability over multiple exposures, and noise in reconstructed CT images. The a-Se detector had the best MTF and the highest DQE (0.6 at 0 lp mm−1) but had the worst stability (45% reduction after 2000 exposure frames). The a-Si detector and the CCD with the 3:1 fibre, both of which used the GOS screen, had very similar performance with a DQE of approximately 0.30 at 0 lp mm−1. For the CCD with the 2:1 fibre, the CsI:Tl screen resulted in a nearly two-fold improvement in DQE over the GOS screen (0.4 versus 0.24 at 0 lp mm−1). The CCDs both had the best stability, with less than a 1% change in pixel values over multiple exposures. The pixel values of the a-Si detector increased 5% over multiple exposures due to the effects of image lag. Despite the higher DQE of the a-Se detector, the reconstructed CT images acquired with the a-Si detector had lower noise levels, likely due to the blurring effects from the phosphor screen.


PACS

87.59.bd Computed radiography

29.40.Wk Solid-state detectors

85.60.Gz Photodetectors (including infrared and CCD detectors)

87.57.N- Image analysis

87.19.X- Diseases

42.30.Lr Modulation and optical transfer functions

Subjects

Accelerators, beams and electromagnetism

Electronics and devices

Nuclear physics

Instrumentation and measurement

Biological physics

Optics, quantum optics and lasers

Medical physics

Particle physics and field theory

Dates

Issue 23 (7 December 2004)

Received 21 July 2004, in final form 4 October 2004

Published 10 November 2004



  1. A comparison of x-ray detectors for mouse CT imaging

    Andrew L Goertzen et al 2004 Phys. Med. Biol. 49 5251

  2. Magnetic trapping of buffer-gas-cooled chromium atoms and prospects for the extension to paramagnetic molecules

    Joost M Bakker et al 2006 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 39 S1111

  3. Single-particle analog to the fractional quantum Hall effect

    Alfred Scharff Goldhaber and M L Horner 2007 J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40 14343

  4. A measure of the information content of EIT data

    Andy Adler et al 2008 Physiol. Meas. 29 S101

  5. Equatorial enhancement of the nighttime OH mesospheric infrared airglow

    D J Baker et al 2007 Phys. Scr. 75 615

  6. Hydrogen adsorption on the (100) surfaces of rhodium and palladium: the influence of non-local exchange - correlation interactions

    A Eichler et al 1996 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8 7659

  7. Ultra high energy cosmic rays and pulsars

    A D Erlykin et al 2002 J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 28 2225

  8. Calorimetric enthalpies for palladium - hydrogen (deuterium) systems at H(D) contents up to about [H]([D])/[Pd] = 0.86

    Y Sakamoto et al 1996 J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8 3229

  9. Isometric embeddings of black-hole horizons in three-dimensional flat space

    Mihai Bondarescu et al 2002 Class. Quantum Grav. 19 375

  10. On the electrical conductivity of seeded air combustion products

    D V Freck 1964 Br. J. Appl. Phys. 15 301

Related review articles

What's this?
View review articles related to this research to gain an insight into the key trends in this subject area. Related review articles are selected based on PACS/MSC codes, and are no more than three years old.

  1. Why do commercial CT scanners still employ traditional, filtered back-projection for image reconstruction?

View by subject




Export








Please login to access our web services, or create an account if you don't yet have one.

You must have cookies enabled in your web browser to be able to login.

Username
Password

Forgotten your password? Get a new one here.