Optimization of Imaging Parameters in Micro-CT Scanner Based On Signal-To-Noise Ratio for the Analysis of Urinary Stone Composition

Document Type : Original Paper


1 Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and natural Sciences, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia

2 Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia

3 Physics Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Indonesia


Introduction: Micro-CT scanner with a resolution of about 5 micrometers is one of the modalities used to create three-dimensional/two-dimensional images of urinary stones. This study aimed to optimize imaging parameters in micro-computed tomography (CT) scanner based on the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of urinary stones for the analysis of stone composition.
Material and Methods: In this study,eight micro-CT scanning protocols were applied to five urinary stones taken from different patients. Each scanning protocol had different voltage, current, and exposure parameters. The reconstructed images were then analyzed based on image brightness and SNR. The optimized imaging parameters which were chosen were that having high SNR because the high-quality image has high SNR.
Results: The results showed that two groups of urinary stones had the same mean Hounsfield Units (HU) value in the third scanning protocols (i.e., 65 kV, 123 µA, and 850 ms). Mean HU values in group one (i.e., stones numbered 1, 3, and 4) were reported as 790, 760, and 720, respectively. The second group (i.e., stones numbered 2 and 5) had mean HU values of -514 and -343, respectively. The imaging parameters (i.e., 75 kV, 106 µA, and 600 ms) had high SNR (25-34) for the first group. The SNR (12.8-13.25) was for the second group at imaging parameters (i.e., 85 kV, 94 µA, and 500 ms).
Conclusion: Based on the SNR, the two optimal imaging parameters for the first and second groups were reported as 75 kV, 106 µA, and 600 ms, as well as 85 kV, 94 µA, and 500 ms, respectively.


Main Subjects

  1. Chatterjee P, Chakraborty A, Mukherjee AK. Phase composition and morphological characterization of human kidney stones using IR spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray Rietveld analysis. Spectrochimia Acta Part A: Molecular and Biomolecular Spectroscopy. 2018; 200: 33-42.
  2. Tseng TY, Preminger GM. Kidney stones: flexible ureteroscopy. Clinical Evidence. 2015; 10: 1-14.
  3. Prywer J,Torzewska A. Impact of bacteria on aggregation of crystalline and amorphous components of infectious urinary stones. 2019; 506: 71-8.
  4. Mayo clinic. Kidney Stone. 2019. Available from: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/kidney-stones/symptoms-causes/syc-20355755.
  5. Cook medical. World Kidney Day: A global look at a growing concern. 2016. Available from: https://www.cookmedical.com/urology/world-kidney-day-a-global-look-at-a-growing-concern/.
  6. Ranabothu S, Bernstein AP, Drzewiech BA. Diagnosis and management of non-calcium-containing stones in the pediatric population. Int Urol and Nephrol. 2018; 50(7): 1191-8.
  7. Vicentini FC, Perrella R, Souza VMG, Hisano M, Murta CB, Clamaro JF. Impact of patient position on the outcomes of percutaneous neprolithotomy for complex kidney stones. 2018; 44(5): 956-97.
  8. Wisenbaugh ES, Paden RG, Silva AC, Humphhreys MR. Dual energy vs conventional computed tomography in determining stone composition. Urology. 2014; 83 (6): 1243-7.
  9. Liden M. A new method for predicting uric acid composition in urinary stones using routine single energy. Urolithiasis. 2018; 46 (4): 325-33.
  10. Park HS, Gong MK, Yoon GY, Moon DG, Cheon J, Choi YD. Computed tomography-based novel prediction model for the outcome of shockwave lithotripsy in proximal ureteral stones. J Endourol. 2016; 30 (7): 810-6.
  11. Stewart G, Johnson L, Ganesh H, Davenport D, Smelser W, Crispen P, et al. Stone size limits the use of Hounsfield Units for prediction of calcium oxalate stone composition. Urology. 2015; 85 (2): 292-5.
  12. Fitri LA, Asyana V, Ridwan T, Anwary F, Soekersi H, Latief FDE , et al. Dual energy micro-CT Skyscan 1173 was able to characterize the composition of the urinary stone. Journal of Physics: conference series. 2016; 694 (1): 1-5.
  13. Ananthakrishnan L, Duan X, Xi Y, Lewis MA, Pearle M S, Antonenlli JA, et all. Dual-layer spectral detector CT: non-inferiority assesment compared to dual-source dual energy CT in discriminating uric acid from non-uric acid renal stones ex vivo. Abdom Radiol. 2018; 43(11): 3075-81.
  14. Hokamp NG, Salem J, Hesse A, Holz JA, Ritter M, Heidenreich A, et al. Low-dose characterization of kidney stones using spectral detector computed tomography: an ex vivo study. Investigative radiology. 2018; 53(8):457-62.
  15. Naseri S, Nezhad MM, Hozhabri Z, Haghparast A, karami G, Hejazi P. Optimization of parameters in 16-slice CT-scan protocols for reduction of the absorbed dose. Iran J Med Phys. 2014; 11 (2): 270-5.
  16. Kalhor P, Changizi V, Hosseini A, Jazayeri E. Optimization of Head CT Protocol to Reduce the Absorbed Dose in Eye Lenses and Thyroid: A Phantom Study. Iran J Med Phys. 2019; 16 (1): 64-74.
  17. Du Plessis A, Boshoff W P. A review of X-ray computed tomography of concrete and asphalt construction materials. Construction and Building Materials. 2019; 199: 637-51.
  18. Lee SC, Kim HK, Chun IK, Cho MH, Lee SY, Cho MH. A flat-panel detector based micro-CT system: performance evaluation for small-animal imaging. Phys. Med. Biol. 2003; 48: 4173–85.
  19. Bultreys T, Boone AM, Boone NM, Schryver TD, Masschaele B, Hoorebeke LV, et al. Fast laboratory-based micro-computed tomography for pore-scale research: Illustrative experiments and perspectives on the future. Advances in Water Resources. 2016; 95: 341–51.
  20. Liu X, Wang J, Lu S, Ge L, Hu F, Li C, et al. Pore-scale characterization of tight sandstone in yanchang formation ordos basin China using micro-CT and SEM imaging from nm- to cm-scale. Fuel. 2017; 209: 254–64.
  21. Szewczykowski, PP, Skarzynski, L. Application of the X-ray micro-computed tomography to the analysis of the structure of polymetric materials. Polimery J. 2019; 64 (10): 12-22.
  22. Koddenberg T, Krause KC, Krause A. Tomographic analysis of siliceous particulates in Australian turpentine wood (Syncarpia golulifera) through X-ray micro-computed tomography. Micron . 2019; 117: 22-8.
  23. Wu H, Zhou Y, Yao Y, Wu K. Imaged based fractal characterization of micro-fracture structure in coal. Fuel J. 2018; 239: 53-62.
  24. Takano N, Fukasawa K, Nishiyabu K. Structural strength prediction for porous titanium based on micro-stress concentration by micro-CT image-based multiscale simulation. Int J of Mech Scien. 2010; 52 (2): 229-35.
  25. Gomila R, Arancibia G, Mery D, Nehler M, Bracke R, Morata D. Palaeopermeability anisotropy and geometrical properties of sealed-microfractures from micro-CT analyses: an open-source implementation. Micron J. 2019; 117: 29–39.
  26. Alexander SL, Rafaels K, Gunnarsson CA, Weerasooriya T. Structural analysis of the frontal and parietal bones of the human skull. J of Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials. 2019; 90: 689-701.
  27. Pratt R, Hutchinson JC, Melbourne A, Zuluaga MA, Virasami A, Vercauteren T, et al. Imaging the human placental microcirculation with micro-focus computed tomography: optimisation of tissue preparation and image acquisition. Placenta. 2017; 60: 36-9.
  28. Bruker micro-CT. Applying Hounsfield unit density calibration in SkyScan CT-analyser. Bruker-microCT Method note. 2005: 1-5.
  29. Zhu S, Tian J, Yan G, Qin C, Liu J. An experimental cone beam micro-CT system for small animal imaging. Int. J Biomed Imaging. 2009; 7258: 960573.
  30. Prewitt JMS, Mendelsohn ML. The analysis of cell images. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1966; 128: 1035-53.
  31. Otsu N. A threshold selection method from gray-level histogram. IEE Transcations on Systems. 1979; 9: 62-6.
  32. Bushberg JT, Seibert JA, Leidholdt EM, Boone JM. The Essential Physics of Medical Imaging. 2rd ed. USA: Lippincott Wiliams & Wilkins; 2002. 
  33. Lee JS, Cho KS, Lee SH, Yoon YE, Kang DH, Jeong WS, et al. Stone heterogeneity index on single-energy noncontrast computed tomography can be a positive predictor of urinary stone composition. Plos One. 2018; 13 (4): e0193945.
  34. Wojcik GS. Determining the uncertainty of X-ray absorption measurements. J of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2004; 109 (5).
  35. Hermanek P, Carmignato S. Porosity measurements by X-ray computed tomography: accuracy evaluation using a calibrated object. Precision Engineering. 2017; 49: 377-87.
  36. Toricelli FCM, Marchini GS, De S, Yamacake KGR, Mazzucchi E, Monga M. Predicting urinary stone composition based on single-energy non-contrast computed tomography: the challenge of cystine. Urology. 2014; 83 (6): 1258-64.
  37. Du Plessis A, le Roux SG, Guelpa A. Comparison of medical and industrial X-ray computed tomography for non-destructive testing. case studies in nondestructive testing and evaluation. 2016; 6 (A): 17-25.
  38. Albrecht MH, Bickford MW, Schoepf UJ, Tesche C, Santis DD, Eid M, et all. Beam-hardening in 70-kV coronary CT angiography: artifact reduction using an advanced post-processing algorithm. Eur J Radiol. 2018; 101: 111-7.
  39. Davoodi M, Abadi SB, Andabili SHA, Kabir A. Comparison of image quality of low voltage 64-slice multidetector CT angiography with the standard condition in patients suspected of pulmonary embolism. Iran J Med Phys. 2018; 15 (4): 237-42.
  40. Langkvist M, Jendeberg J, Thunberg P, Loutfi A, Liden M. Computer aided detection of ureteral stones in thin slice computed tomography volumes using convolutional neural networks. Computers in Biology and Medicine. 2018; 97: 153-60.


Volume 17, Issue 3
May and June 2020
Pages 153-160
  • Receive Date: 08 February 2019
  • Revise Date: 02 July 2019
  • Accept Date: 12 July 2019
  • First Publish Date: 01 May 2020