Using Correlative Properties of Neighboring Pixels to Improve Gray-White Differentiation in Pediatric Head CT Images

References

1. 1.↵
   2. Truwit CL,
   3. Barkovich AJ,
   4. Gean-Marton A, et al

   . Loss of the insular ribbon: another early CT sign of acute middle cerebral artery infarction. Radiology 1990;176:801–06 doi:10.1148/radiology.176.3.2389039 pmid:2389039

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   2. Moulin T,
   3. Cattin F,
   4. Crépin-Leblond T, et al

   . Early CT signs in acute middle cerebral artery infarction: predictive value for subsequent infarct locations and outcome. Neurology 1996;47:366–75 doi:10.1212/WNL.47.2.366 pmid:8757006

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
3. 3.↵
   2. Weinstein MA,
   3. Duchesneau PM,
   4. MacIntyre WJ

   . White and gray matter of the brain differentiated by computed tomography. Radiology 1977;122:699–702 doi:10.1148/122.3.699 pmid:841054

   CrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   2. Brenner DJ,
   3. Hall EJ

   . Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277–84 doi:10.1056/NEJMra072149 pmid:18046031

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
5. 5.↵
   2. Pearce MS,
   3. Salotti JA,
   4. Little MP, et al

   . Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:499–505 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60815-0 pmid:22681860

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   2. Palmer E

   . Image Gently Think A-Head Campaign focuses on pediatric head CT protocols. Radiol Technol 2017;88:446–47 pmid:28298507

   FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   2. Frush DP,
   3. Lungren MP

   . The Image Gently Think A-Head Campaign: keep calm and image gently. J Am Coll Radiol 2017;14:301–02 doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2016.12.009 pmid:28161026

   CrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   2. Applegate KE,
   3. Cost NG

   . Image Gently: a campaign to reduce children's and adolescents' risk for cancer during adulthood. J Adolesc Health 2013;52(5 Suppl):S93–97 doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.03.006 pmid:23601618

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   2. Goske MJ,
   3. Applegate KE,
   4. Boylan J, et al

   . The ‘Image Gently’ campaign: increasing CT radiation dose awareness through a national education and awareness program. Pediatr Radiol 2008;38:265–69 doi:10.1007/s00247-007-0743-3 pmid:18202842

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    2. McCollough CH,
    3. Primak AN,
    4. Braun N, et al

    . Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2009;47:27–40 doi:10.1016/j.rcl.2008.10.006 pmid:19195532

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
11. 11.↵
    2. Wu TH,
    3. Hung SC,
    4. Sun JY, et al

    . How far can the radiation dose be lowered in head CT with iterative reconstruction? Analysis of imaging quality and diagnostic accuracy. Eur Radiol 2013;23:2612–21 doi:10.1007/s00330-013-2846-6 pmid:23645331

    CrossRefPubMed
12. 12.↵
    2. Bodelle B,
    3. Wichmann JL,
    4. Scholtz JE, et al

    . Iterative reconstruction leads to increased subjective and objective image quality in cranial CT in patients with stroke. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2015;205:618–22 doi:10.2214/AJR.15.14389 pmid:26295650

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    2. Bier G,
    3. Bongers MN,
    4. Ditt H, et al

    . Enhanced gray-white matter differentiation on non-enhanced CT using a frequency selective non-linear blending. Neuroradiology 2016;58:649–55 doi:10.1007/s00234-016-1674-1 pmid:26961306

    CrossRefPubMed
14. 14.↵
    2. Löve A,
    3. Siemund R,
    4. Höglund P, et al

    . Hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm in brain CT: a radiation dose reduction and image quality assessment study. Acta Radiol 2014;55:208–17 doi:10.1177/0284185113494980 pmid:23897306

    CrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    2. Greess H,
    3. Wolf H,
    4. Baum U, et al

    . Dose reduction in computed tomography by attenuation-based on-line modulation of tube current: evaluation of six anatomical regions. Eur Radiol 2000;10:391–94 doi:10.1007/s003300050062 pmid:10663775

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    2. Mulkens TH,
    3. Bellinck P,
    4. Baeyaert M, et al

    . Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: clinical evaluation. Radiology 2005;237:213–23 doi:10.1148/radiol.2363041220 pmid:16126917

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    2. Graser A,
    3. Wintersperger BJ,
    4. Suess C, et al

    . Dose reduction and image quality in MDCT colonography using tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:695–701 doi:10.2214/AJR.05.0662 pmid:16928932

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
18. 18.↵
    2. Sharma A,
    3. Goyal M,
    4. Miller-Thomas M, et al

    . Feasibility of improving detection of early ischemic infarction on head CT using continuity-based correlative enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Radiological Society of North America 2015 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois. November 29 to December 4, 2015. http://archive.rsna.org/2015/15010218.html. Accessed March 6, 2016.
19. 19.↵
    2. Sharma A,
    3. JP,
    4. Warren LA,
    5. Parsons MS, et al

    . Feasibility of using continuity-based correlative enhancement for improving recognition of structural details based on gray-white differentiation in head CT images. In: Proceedings of the Radiological Society of North America 2015 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois. November 29 to December 4, 2015. http://archive.rsna.org/2015/PediatricRadiology.pdf. Accessed March 6, 2016.
20. 20.↵
    2. Parsons M,
    3. Sharma A,
    4. Mhapsekar R, et al

    . Image processing to improve visualization of mesial temporal sclerosis on MRI. In: Proceedings of the Radiological Society of North America 2016 Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois. November 27 to December 2, 2016. archive.rsna.org/2016/16018969.html. Accessed March 20, 2017.
21. 21.↵
    2. Frush DP

    . Justification and optimization of CT in children: how are we performing? Pediatr Radiol 2011;41(Suppl 2):467–71 doi:10.1007/s00247-011-2097-0 pmid:21847724

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    2. Goske MJ,
    3. Applegate KE,
    4. Boylan J, et al

    . The Image Gently Campaign: working together to change practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:273–74 doi:10.2214/AJR.07.3526 pmid:18212208

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
23. 23.↵
    2. Hall EJ

    . Lessons we have learned from our children: cancer risks from diagnostic radiology. Pediatr Radiol 2002;32:700–06 doi:10.1007/s00247-002-0774-8 pmid:12244457

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    2. Lev MH,
    3. Farkas J,
    4. Gemmete JJ, et al

    . Acute stroke: improved nonenhanced CT detection—benefits of soft-copy interpretation by using variable window width and center level settings. Radiology 1999;213:150–55 doi:10.1148/radiology.213.1.r99oc10150 pmid:10540655

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    2. Kuo R,
    3. Cheng SJ,
    4. Huang JK, et al

    . Promotion of residents' diagnostic accuracy of early ischemic infarct on nonenhanced brain computed tomography with a modified window setting. Neurologist 2010;16:306–07 doi:10.1097/NRL.0b013e3181d9d69a pmid:20827119

    CrossRefPubMed
26. 26.↵
    2. Arsava EM,
    3. Saarinen JT,
    4. Unal A, et al

    . Impact of window setting optimization on accuracy of computed tomography and computed tomography angiography source image-based Alberta Stroke Program Early Computed Tomography Score. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;23:12–16 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2012.05.012 pmid:22748712

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    2. Sahi K,
    3. Jackson S,
    4. Wiebe E, et al

    . The value of “liver windows” settings in the detection of small renal cell carcinomas on unenhanced computed tomography. Can Assoc Radiol J 2014;65:71–76 doi:10.1016/j.carj.2012.12.005 pmid:23706868

    CrossRefPubMed
28. 28.↵
    2. Sanelli PC,
    3. Sykes JB,
    4. Ford AL, et al

    . Imaging and treatment of patients with acute stroke: an evidence-based review. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:1045–51 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3518 pmid:23598836

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
29. 29.↵
    2. Abdel Razek AA,
    3. Kandell AY,
    4. Elsorogy LG, et al

    . Disorders of cortical formation: MR imaging features. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:4–11 pmid:10.3174/ajnr.A1223pmid:18687750

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    2. Bongers MN,
    3. Bier G,
    4. Ditt H, et al

    . Improved CT detection of acute herpes simplex virus type 1 encephalitis based on a frequency-selective nonlinear blending: comparison with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;207:1082–88 doi:10.2214/AJR.16.16032 pmid:27533625

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    2. Tomura N,
    3. Uemura K,
    4. Inugami A, et al

    . Early CT finding in cerebral infarction: obscuration of the lentiform nucleus. Radiology 1988;168:463–67 doi:10.1148/radiology.168.2.3393665 pmid:3393665

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    2. Bier G,
    3. Bongers MN,
    4. Ditt H, et al

    . Accuracy of non-enhanced CT in detecting early ischemic edema using frequency selective non-linear blending. PLoS One 2016;11:e0147378 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147378 pmid:26809010

    CrossRefPubMed