Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue
Abstract
When imaging soft tissues with hard X-rays, phase contrast is often preferred over conventional attenuation contrast due its superior sensitivity. However, it is unclear which of the numerous phase tomography methods yields the optimized results at given experimental conditions. Therefore, we quantitatively compared the three phase tomography methods implemented at the beamline ID19 of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility: X-ray grating interferometry (XGI), and propagation-based phase tomography, i.e., single-distance phase retrieval (SDPR) and holotomography (HT), using cancerous tissue from a mouse model and an entire heart of a rat. We show that for both specimens, the spatial resolution derived from the characteristic morphological features is about a factor of two better for HT and SDPR compared to XGI, whereas the XGI data generally exhibit much better contrast-to-noise ratios for the anatomical features. Moreover, XGI excels in fidelity of the density measurements, and is also more robust against low-frequency artifacts than HT, but it might suffer from phase-wrapping artifacts. Thus, we can regard the three phase tomography methods discussed as complementary. The application will decide which spatial and density resolutions are desired, for the imaging task and dose requirements, and, in addition, the applicant must choose between the complexity of themore »
- Authors:
-
- Biomaterials Science Center, University of Basel, Basel (Switzerland)
- European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble (France)
- Laboratory for Micro- and Nanotechnology, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen (Switzerland)
- Institute of Microstructure Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen (Germany)
- Physik-Department und Institut für Medizintechnik, Technische Universität München, Garching (Germany)
- France
- Publication Date:
- OSTI Identifier:
- 22305852
- Resource Type:
- Journal Article
- Journal Name:
- Journal of Applied Physics
- Additional Journal Information:
- Journal Volume: 116; Journal Issue: 15; Other Information: (c) 2014 AIP Publishing LLC; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); Journal ID: ISSN 0021-8979
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
- Subject:
- 46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; 75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND SUPERFLUIDITY; ANIMAL TISSUES; ATTENUATION; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; DATA PROCESSING; EUROPEAN SYNCHROTRON RADIATION FACILITY; HARD X RADIATION; INTERFEROMETRY; NOISE; PLANT TISSUES; RADIATION DOSES; SENSITIVITY; SPATIAL RESOLUTION; TOMOGRAPHY
Citation Formats
Lang, S., Schulz, G., Müller, B., Zanette, I., E-mail: irene.zanette@tum.de, European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble, Dominietto, M., Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Langer, M., Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-LYON, Université de Lyon 1, Villeurbane, Rack, A., Le Duc, G., David, C., Mohr, J., Pfeiffer, F., Weitkamp, T., and Synchrotron Soleil, Gif-sur-Yvette. Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue. United States: N. p., 2014.
Web. doi:10.1063/1.4897225.
Lang, S., Schulz, G., Müller, B., Zanette, I., E-mail: irene.zanette@tum.de, European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble, Dominietto, M., Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Langer, M., Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-LYON, Université de Lyon 1, Villeurbane, Rack, A., Le Duc, G., David, C., Mohr, J., Pfeiffer, F., Weitkamp, T., & Synchrotron Soleil, Gif-sur-Yvette. Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue. United States. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4897225
Lang, S., Schulz, G., Müller, B., Zanette, I., E-mail: irene.zanette@tum.de, European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble, Dominietto, M., Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Langer, M., Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-LYON, Université de Lyon 1, Villeurbane, Rack, A., Le Duc, G., David, C., Mohr, J., Pfeiffer, F., Weitkamp, T., and Synchrotron Soleil, Gif-sur-Yvette. 2014.
"Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue". United States. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4897225.
@article{osti_22305852,
title = {Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue},
author = {Lang, S. and Schulz, G. and Müller, B. and Zanette, I., E-mail: irene.zanette@tum.de and European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble and Dominietto, M. and Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zürich, Zürich and Langer, M. and Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-LYON, Université de Lyon 1, Villeurbane and Rack, A. and Le Duc, G. and David, C. and Mohr, J. and Pfeiffer, F. and Weitkamp, T. and Synchrotron Soleil, Gif-sur-Yvette},
abstractNote = {When imaging soft tissues with hard X-rays, phase contrast is often preferred over conventional attenuation contrast due its superior sensitivity. However, it is unclear which of the numerous phase tomography methods yields the optimized results at given experimental conditions. Therefore, we quantitatively compared the three phase tomography methods implemented at the beamline ID19 of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility: X-ray grating interferometry (XGI), and propagation-based phase tomography, i.e., single-distance phase retrieval (SDPR) and holotomography (HT), using cancerous tissue from a mouse model and an entire heart of a rat. We show that for both specimens, the spatial resolution derived from the characteristic morphological features is about a factor of two better for HT and SDPR compared to XGI, whereas the XGI data generally exhibit much better contrast-to-noise ratios for the anatomical features. Moreover, XGI excels in fidelity of the density measurements, and is also more robust against low-frequency artifacts than HT, but it might suffer from phase-wrapping artifacts. Thus, we can regard the three phase tomography methods discussed as complementary. The application will decide which spatial and density resolutions are desired, for the imaging task and dose requirements, and, in addition, the applicant must choose between the complexity of the experimental setup and the one of data processing.},
doi = {10.1063/1.4897225},
url = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/22305852},
journal = {Journal of Applied Physics},
issn = {0021-8979},
number = 15,
volume = 116,
place = {United States},
year = {Tue Oct 21 00:00:00 EDT 2014},
month = {Tue Oct 21 00:00:00 EDT 2014}
}