Artifact Correction Algorithm Selection for Medical Imaging

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current methods for correcting metal artifacts in computed tomography images are inadequate as they fail to account for the individual properties of implants, leading to unsatisfactory correction results, especially when multiple implants are present, and often rely on manual selection of algorithms without considering specific characteristics.

Innovation Solution

A method that identifies object elements causing artifacts within the image data record, determines their characteristics, and selects a suitable artifact correction algorithm based on these properties to improve adaptation and correction efficacy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If manual selection of artifact correction algorithms is used, then the correction process is simple to operate, but the correction results are unsatisfactory because individual implant properties are not considered

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveartifact correction precisionVSAvoidalgorithm selection complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system automatically identifies object elements causing artifacts and determines their characteristics without user intervention. The artifact correction algorithm is then automatically selected based on these characteristics, eliminating the need for manual algorithm selection while achieving precise correction adapted to individual implant properties.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system determines multiple characteristics (parameters) of object elements including size, density, shape, and material composition. These parameter variations are used to select from different artifact correction algorithms, allowing the correction precision to adapt to the specific properties of each implant rather than using a fixed manual selection approach.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If generic artifact correction methods are applied without considering object element properties, then the correction process is fast and simple, but the correction results are inadequate especially for multiple implants

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveartifact correction precisionVSAvoidcorrection processing time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary identification and characterization of object elements before applying artifact correction. By determining the characteristics of implants in advance, the system can pre-select the most appropriate correction algorithm, avoiding trial-and-error approaches and reducing overall processing time while improving correction precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system determines individual characteristics for each object element (size, density, shape, material) and selects correction algorithms specifically adapted to each local situation. This localized approach ensures that each implant receives the most appropriate correction method rather than applying a generic correction to all objects, improving overall correction precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Manufacturing precision

If quantitative analysis of object elements is performed to select correction algorithms, then correction efficacy is improved, but the measurement and detection difficulty increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecorrection algorithm adaptation precisionVSAvoidobject element characteristic measurement difficulty
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces manual visual inspection and subjective assessment of object elements with automated computational analysis. Image processing algorithms automatically extract quantitative characteristics (size, density, shape, material composition) from the image data, eliminating the need for manual measurement while achieving precise quantitative analysis for algorithm selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system introduces intermediate processing steps that automatically extract and analyze object element characteristics from raw image data. These intermediate computational processes serve as mediators between the raw images and the final algorithm selection, automatically determining size, density, shape, and material properties without requiring direct manual measurement or interpretation.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Data Source

PatentUS10388037B2Selection method for an artifact correction algorithm, data processing facility for performing the method, and medical imaging system
Publication Date: 2019.08.20 SIEMENS HEALTHINEERS AG
  • US10388037B2 patent drawing
  • US10388037B2 patent drawing

AI summary

According to an embodiment of the application, a method is provided for selecting an algorithm for correcting at least one image artifact in an image data record acquired by a medical imaging system and representing at least one region of interest of a subject under examination. The method includes identifying from the image data record at least one object element causing the image artifact and lying inside the region of interest of the subject under examination; determining from the image data record at least one characteristic describing the object element; determining an artifact correction algorithm on the basis of the at least one characteristic; and applying the artifact correction algorithm to the image data record. An embodiment of the application also provides a corresponding data processing facility and a medical imaging system.