Cubic-Spline Interpolation for Sparse-View CT Image Reconstruction With Filtered Backprojection in Dynamic Myocardial Perfusion Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated a projection interpolation method for reconstructing dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) heart images from undersampled x-ray projections with filtered backprojecton (FBP). This method may facilitate the application of sparse-view dynamic acquisition for ultralow-dose quantitative computed tomography (CT) myocardial perfusion (MP) imaging. We conducted CT perfusion studies on 5 pigs with a standard full-view acquisition protocol (984 projections). We reconstructed DCE heart images with FBP from all and a quarter of the measured projections evenly distributed over 360°. We interpolated the sparse-view (quarter) projections to a full-view setting using a cubic-spline interpolation method before applying FBP to reconstruct the DCE heart images (synthesized full-view). To generate MP maps, we used 3 sets of DCE heart images, and compared mean MP values and biases among the 3 protocols. Compared with synthesized full-view DCE images, sparse-view DCE images were more affected by streak artifacts arising from projection undersampling. Relative to the full-view protocol, mean bias in MP measurement associated with the sparse-view protocol was 10.0 mL/min/100 g (95%CI: -8.9 to 28.9), which was >3 times higher than that associated with the synthesized full-view protocol (3.3 mL/min/100 g, 95% CI: -6.7 to 13.2). The cubic-spline-view interpolation method improved MP measurement from DCE heart images reconstructed from only a quarter of the full projection set. This method can be used with the industry-standard FBP algorithm to reconstruct DCE images of the heart, and it can reduce the radiation dose of a whole-heart quantitative CT MP study to <2 mSv (at 8-cm coverage).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".