Novel Technology Allowing Cone Beam Computed Tomography in 6 Seconds: A Patient Study of Comparative Image Quality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the image quality provided by a novel cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) platform (HyperSight, Varian Medical Systems), a platform with enhanced reconstruction algorithms as well as rapid acquisition times. Image quality was compared with both status quo CBCT for image guidance, and to fan beam CT (FBCT) acquired on a CT simulator (CTsim). METHODS AND MATERIALS: In a clinical study, 30 individuals were recruited for whom either deep inspiration (DIBH) or deep exhalation breath hold (DEBH) was used during imaging and radiation treatment of tumors involving liver, lung, breast, abdomen, chest wall, and pancreatic sites. All subjects were imaged during breath hold with CBCT on a standard image guidance platform (TrueBeam 2.7, Varian Medical Systems) and FBCT CT (CTsim, GE Optima). HyperSight imaging with both breath hold (HSBH) and free breathing (HSFB) was performed in a single session. The 4 image sets thus acquired were registered and compared using metrics quantifying artifact index, image nonuniformity, contrast, contrast-to-noise ratio, and difference of Hounsfield unit (HU) from CTsim. RESULTS: HSBH provided less severe artifacts compared with both HSFB and TrueBeam. The severity of artifacts in HSBH images was similar to that in CTsim images, with statistically similar artifact index values. CTsim provided the best image uniformity; however, HSBH provided improved uniformity compared with both HSFB and TrueBeam. CTsim demonstrated elevated contrast compared with HyperSight imaging, but both HSBH and HSFB imaging showed superior contrast-to-noise ratio characteristics compared with TrueBeam. The median HU difference of HSBH from CTsim was within 1 HU for muscle/fat tissue, 12 HU for bone, and 14 HU for lung. CONCLUSIONS: The HyperSight system provides 6-second CBCT acquisition with image artifacts that are significantly reduced compared with TrueBeam and comparable to those in CTsim FBCT imaging. HyperSight breath hold imaging was of higher quality compared with free breathing imaging on the same system. The median HU value in HyperSight breath hold imaging is within 15 HU of that in CTsim imaging for muscle, fat, bone, and lung tissue types, indicating the utility of image data for direct dose calculation in adaptive workflows.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".