Evaluation of postprocessing dual-energy methods in quantitative computed tomography: Part 1. Theoretical considerations

Cornelis Van Kuijk*, Jan L. Grashuis, Jack C M Steenbeek, Henri E. SchÜtte, Willem Th Trouerbach

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Five postprocessing methods for dual-energy quantitative computed tomography of the vertebral body were evaluated theoretically. The methods were compared by transforming the original sets of equations to a standard set. Only two of these methods produced optimal results, namely the basic approach of Goodsitt et al and the method of Nickoloff et al. The calibration approach of Goodsitt et al will produce optimal results only if calibration materials are available that mimic the anatomic constituents of the vertebral body better than those available currently. Theoretically, the methods of Cann et al and of Laval-Jeantet et al will not produce optimal results.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)876-881
Number of pages6
JournalInvestigative Radiology
Volume25
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - 1990

Cite this

Van Kuijk, C., Grashuis, J. L., Steenbeek, J. C. M., SchÜtte, H. E., & Trouerbach, W. T. (1990). Evaluation of postprocessing dual-energy methods in quantitative computed tomography: Part 1. Theoretical considerations. Investigative Radiology, 25(8), 876-881.