Yunjie Yang, Donghoon Lee, Matthew Whitaker, Wendy Harris, Jeho Jeong, Shih-Chi Lin, Ellen Yorke, Lakshmi Santanam, Grace Tang
{"title":"具有空间完整性和图像质量自动分析的综合4DCT成像QA简化工作流程","authors":"Yunjie Yang, Donghoon Lee, Matthew Whitaker, Wendy Harris, Jeho Jeong, Shih-Chi Lin, Ellen Yorke, Lakshmi Santanam, Grace Tang","doi":"10.1002/acm2.70168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>A comprehensive 4DCT QA program that includes the assessment of spatial integrity and image quality of 4D phantom scans can be resource-intensive, especially because the analysis burden scales with the number of motion traces used for QA. This work presents a streamlined and scalable workflow, enabled by the use of a widely available phantom and an automated analysis tool.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>For 4DCT imaging QA, the Catphan was placed on the QUASAR motion platform, driven with sinusoidal motion traces of various amplitudes and frequencies. The acquired image sets were automatically analyzed using a newly designed 4DCT analysis module in TotalQA. The metrics of interest for 4DCT QA were analyzed for image sets of all motion bins and compared to the stationary reference image set. Three broad categories of imaging tests for 4DCT QA were defined: spatial integrity, HU constancy, and image quality. The sensitometry plugs in the Catphan were used as motion surrogates for evaluating spatial integrity, including the dimensions of the plugs and the observed motion amplitude in the scans. HU values of the sensitometry plugs in different phases were evaluated for consistency. For image quality, spatial resolution, low contrast resolution, and image noise were evaluated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Compared to the stationary reference CT, spatial integrity was within ±1 mm and the HU values were within two HU in the 4DCT for all phases. The spatial resolution was consistent while slightly higher noise was observed in the 4DCT images. The automated analysis in TotalQA was completed in approximately 20 min per motion trace, improving efficiency by more than 80% compared to the manual workflow.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>A streamlined 4DCT imaging QA workflow with automated analysis offers a robust assessment of imaging quality and motion accuracy in 4DCT scans, enabling an efficient and consistent QA process in large healthcare networks.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":"26 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70168","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A streamlined workflow for comprehensive 4DCT imaging QA with automated analysis of spatial integrity and image quality\",\"authors\":\"Yunjie Yang, Donghoon Lee, Matthew Whitaker, Wendy Harris, Jeho Jeong, Shih-Chi Lin, Ellen Yorke, Lakshmi Santanam, Grace Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/acm2.70168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Purpose</h3>\\n \\n <p>A comprehensive 4DCT QA program that includes the assessment of spatial integrity and image quality of 4D phantom scans can be resource-intensive, especially because the analysis burden scales with the number of motion traces used for QA. This work presents a streamlined and scalable workflow, enabled by the use of a widely available phantom and an automated analysis tool.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>For 4DCT imaging QA, the Catphan was placed on the QUASAR motion platform, driven with sinusoidal motion traces of various amplitudes and frequencies. The acquired image sets were automatically analyzed using a newly designed 4DCT analysis module in TotalQA. The metrics of interest for 4DCT QA were analyzed for image sets of all motion bins and compared to the stationary reference image set. Three broad categories of imaging tests for 4DCT QA were defined: spatial integrity, HU constancy, and image quality. The sensitometry plugs in the Catphan were used as motion surrogates for evaluating spatial integrity, including the dimensions of the plugs and the observed motion amplitude in the scans. HU values of the sensitometry plugs in different phases were evaluated for consistency. For image quality, spatial resolution, low contrast resolution, and image noise were evaluated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Compared to the stationary reference CT, spatial integrity was within ±1 mm and the HU values were within two HU in the 4DCT for all phases. The spatial resolution was consistent while slightly higher noise was observed in the 4DCT images. The automated analysis in TotalQA was completed in approximately 20 min per motion trace, improving efficiency by more than 80% compared to the manual workflow.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>A streamlined 4DCT imaging QA workflow with automated analysis offers a robust assessment of imaging quality and motion accuracy in 4DCT scans, enabling an efficient and consistent QA process in large healthcare networks.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"volume\":\"26 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/acm2.70168\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70168\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/acm2.70168","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
A streamlined workflow for comprehensive 4DCT imaging QA with automated analysis of spatial integrity and image quality
Purpose
A comprehensive 4DCT QA program that includes the assessment of spatial integrity and image quality of 4D phantom scans can be resource-intensive, especially because the analysis burden scales with the number of motion traces used for QA. This work presents a streamlined and scalable workflow, enabled by the use of a widely available phantom and an automated analysis tool.
Methods
For 4DCT imaging QA, the Catphan was placed on the QUASAR motion platform, driven with sinusoidal motion traces of various amplitudes and frequencies. The acquired image sets were automatically analyzed using a newly designed 4DCT analysis module in TotalQA. The metrics of interest for 4DCT QA were analyzed for image sets of all motion bins and compared to the stationary reference image set. Three broad categories of imaging tests for 4DCT QA were defined: spatial integrity, HU constancy, and image quality. The sensitometry plugs in the Catphan were used as motion surrogates for evaluating spatial integrity, including the dimensions of the plugs and the observed motion amplitude in the scans. HU values of the sensitometry plugs in different phases were evaluated for consistency. For image quality, spatial resolution, low contrast resolution, and image noise were evaluated.
Results
Compared to the stationary reference CT, spatial integrity was within ±1 mm and the HU values were within two HU in the 4DCT for all phases. The spatial resolution was consistent while slightly higher noise was observed in the 4DCT images. The automated analysis in TotalQA was completed in approximately 20 min per motion trace, improving efficiency by more than 80% compared to the manual workflow.
Conclusions
A streamlined 4DCT imaging QA workflow with automated analysis offers a robust assessment of imaging quality and motion accuracy in 4DCT scans, enabling an efficient and consistent QA process in large healthcare networks.
期刊介绍：
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
