Photon-Counting CT Parameter Adaptation via Historical Attenuation

Solution Overview

Problem

The accuracy of material decomposition in Photon-Counting Computed Tomography (PCCT) imaging depends on scanning systems and processing parameters, making it challenging to consistently obtain reliable quantitative results across different scans of the same subject.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that determine current scanning and processing parameters by comparing current and historical information of a subject, using a personal database to adjust parameters based on radiation attenuation variations, ensuring consistent imaging results.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If different scanning parameters are used for different scans, then the scanning system can be adapted to different subjects, but the accuracy of quantitative material decomposition results deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvescanning parameter adaptabilityVSAvoidquantitative material decomposition accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSMeasurement precision

Solution Approach 1:

The system determines current scanning and processing parameters by comparing current scan information with historical scan information of the same subject. This involves adjusting parameters such as tube voltage, tube current, and processing parameters based on the subject's radiation attenuation characteristics to maintain consistency across multiple scans

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from historical scan data to optimize current scanning parameters. By analyzing previous scan results and comparing them with current scan information, the system automatically adjusts parameters to maintain quantitative consistency, creating a closed-loop parameter determination process

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

2Measurement precision

If scanning parameters are standardized across all subjects, then quantitative comparability improves, but the ability to optimize for individual subjects deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvequantitative result comparabilityVSAvoidsubject-specific optimization

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system determines current scanning and processing parameters by comparing current scan information with historical scan information of the same subject. This involves adjusting parameters such as tube voltage, tube current, and processing parameters based on the subject's radiation attenuation characteristics to maintain consistency across multiple scans

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary determination of scanning parameters by comparing current scan information with historical data before actual scanning. This preliminary parameter optimization ensures that the subsequent scan will produce quantitatively comparable results while being optimized for the specific subject

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

3Measurement precision

If manual parameter adjustment is used for each scan, then imaging accuracy can be optimized, but the time and complexity of the process increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvematerial decomposition accuracyVSAvoidparameter determination time

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs automatic determination of scanning and processing parameters by comparing current scan information with historical data. This self-service approach eliminates the need for manual parameter adjustment by operators, allowing the system to autonomously optimize parameters based on accumulated historical information

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses feedback from historical scan data to optimize current scanning parameters. By analyzing previous scan results and comparing them with current scan information, the system automatically adjusts parameters to maintain quantitative consistency, creating a closed-loop parameter determination process

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach improves the accuracy and reliability of material decomposition results by allowing for quantitative comparability of scans, facilitating better diagnosis and treatment by maintaining consistent imaging parameters across series scans.

Implementation Method 1

Photon-Counting Computed Tomography (PCCT) has been widely used in medical imaging

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectPhoton counting: Photoelectric Effect

Implementation Method 2

The current information including information relating to current radiation attenuation of the target object

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectRadiation attenuation: Absorption (EM radiation)

Data Source

PatentUS20240358339A1Methods and systems for imaging

Publication Date: 2024.10.31 SHANGHAI UNITED IMAGING HEALTHCARE

AI summary

The present disclosure is related to methods and systems for imaging. The method may include obtaining current information of a target subject. The current information may include information relating to current radiation attenuation of the target object. The method may also include obtaining reference information of the target subject. The reference information may include information relating to historical radiation attenuation of the target object. The method may also include determining at least one current parameter of the target subject based on the current information and the reference information. The method may also include obtaining a target image of the target subject based on the at least one current parameter.