Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics

Application of Fast Non-Local Denoising Approach in Digital Radiography Using Lung Nodule Phantom for Radiation Dose Reduction

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors
Jina Shim 1
Myonggeun Yoon 2
Youngjin Lee 3
1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Severance Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea
2 Department of Bio-Convergence Engineering, Korea University, Seoul, Republic of Korea
3 Department of Radiological Science, Gachon University, Incheon, Republic of Korea
10.22038/ijmp.2022.60000.2009
Abstract
Introduction: Chest X-ray imaging has become the most commonly used, as it is the primary method for lung cancer screening during medical check-ups.  The radiation dose should be minimized to ensure that the patients are not overexposed to radiation. However, radiation dose reduction results in increased noise in the chest X-ray image. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of fast non-local means (FNLM) filters to reduce radiation dose while maintaining sufficient image quality.
Material and Methods: This study evaluates three filters (median, Wiener, and total variation) and a newly proposed filter (fast non-local means (FNLM)), which reduce image noise. A realistic anthropomorphic phantom is used to compare images acquired depending on positions such as anterior-posterior, lateral, and posterior-anterior, using a self-produced 3D printed lung nodule phantom. To evaluate image quality, we used the normalized noise power spectrum (NNPS), contrast to noise ratio (CNR), and coefficient of variation (COV) evaluation parameters.
Results: The NNPS and COV were lowest and the CNR was highest with FNLM images. FNLM filter outperforms other compared filters in terms of noise reduction.
Conclusion: Therefore, the use of an FNLM filter is recommended, because it reduces the radiation dose to a patient and thus minimizes the risk of cancer, while maintaining diagnostic quality.
Keywords
Digital Radiography X
Ray Image Denoising Fast Non
Local Means (FNLM) Approach 3D Printing Quantitative Evaluation of Image Quality
Subjects
  1. Schauer DA, Linton OW. NCRP report No. 160, ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States, medical exposure—are we doing less with more, and is there a role for health physicists? Health Phys. 2009;97(1):1-5.
  2. Do KH, Jung SE. Current status of medical radiation exposure in Korea–recent efforts to develop a radiation exposure control system focussed on justification and optimisation. Annals of the ICRP. 2016 Jun;45(1_suppl):113-21
  3. Uffmann M, Schaefer-Prokop C. Digital radiography: the balance between image quality and required radiation dose. European journal of radiology. 2009 Nov 1;72(2):202-8.
  4. Geijer H, Norrman E, Persliden J. Optimizing the tube potential for lumbar spine radiography with a flat-panel digital detector. The British Journal of Radiology. 2009 Jan;82(973):62-8.
  5. Kim H, Park M, Park S, Jeong H, Kim J, Kim Y. Estimation of absorbed organ doses and effective dose based on body mass index in digital radiography. Radiation protection dosimetry. 2013 Jan 1;153(1):92-9.
  6. Hill KD, Einstein AJ. New approaches to reduce radiation exposure. Trends in cardiovascular medicine. 2016 Jan 1;26(1):55-65.
  7. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography—an increasing source of radiation exposure. New England journal of medicine. 2007 Nov 29;357(22):2277-84.
  8. Kang H, Lee ES, Park HJ, Park BK, Park JY, Suh S-W. Abdominal digital radiography with a novel post-processing technique: phantom and patient studies. Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology. 2020 Jul 1;81(4)
  9. Anam C, Adi K, Sutanto H, Arifin Z, Budi WS, Fujibuchi T, Dougherty G. Noise reduction in CT images using a selective mean filter. Journal of biomedical physics & engineering. 2020 Oct;10(5):623.
  10. Lim JS. Two-dimensional signal and image processing. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs; 1990.
  11. Strong D, Chan T. Edge-preserving and scale-dependent properties of total variation regularization. Inverse problems. 2003 Nov 12;19(6):S165.
  12. Buades A, Coll B, Morel J-M. A review of image denoising algorithms, with a new one. Multiscale modeling & simulation. 2005;4(2):490-530.
  13. Darbon J, Cunha A, Chan TF, Osher S, Jensen GJ. Fast nonlocal filtering applied to electron cryomicroscopy. In2008 5th IEEE International Symposium on biomedical imaging: from nano to macro 2008 May 14 (pp. 1331-1334). IEEE.
  14. Doo K, Kang E, Yong H, Woo O, Lee K, Oh Y. Accuracy of lung nodule volumetry in low-dose CT with iterative reconstruction: an anthropomorphic thoracic phantom study. The British Journal of Radiology. 2014 Sep;87(1041):20130644.
  15. Buades A, Coll B, Morel J-M. A non-local algorithm for image denoising. In2005 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR'05) 2005 Jun 20 (Vol. 2, pp. 60-65). IEEE.
  16. Yaroslavsky LP. Digital picture processing: an introduction. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012. Dec 6.
  17. Tomasi C, Manduchi R. Bilateral filtering for gray and color images. InSixth international conference on computer vision (IEEE Cat. No. 98CH36271) 1998 Jan 7 (pp. 839-846). IEEE.
  18. Smith SM, Brady JM. SUSAN—a new approach to low level image processing. International journal of computer vision. 1997 May;23(1):45-78.
  19. Tschumperlé D, Brun L. Non-local image smoothing by applying anisotropic diffusion PDE's in the space of patches. In2009 16th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) 2009 Nov 7 (pp. 2957-2960). IEEE.
  20. Ghetti C, Borrini A, Ortenzia O, Rossi R, Ordóñez PL. Physical characteristics of GE Senographe Essential and DS digital mammography detectors. Medical physics. 2008 Feb;35(2):456-63.
  21. Brown CE. Applied multivariate statistics in geohydrology and related sciences. Berlin: Springer; 1998. p. 155-157.
  22. Varghese T, Ophir J. An analysis of elastographic contrast-to-noise ratio. Ultrasound in medicine & biology. 1998 Jul 1;24(6):915-24.
  23. Lee T-Y, Chhem RK. Impact of new technologies on dose reduction in CT. European journal of radiology. 2010 Oct 1;76(1):28-35..
  24. Hsieh J. Adaptive streak artifact reduction in computed tomography resulting from excessive x‐ray photon noise. Medical Physics. 1998 Nov;25(11):2139-47..
  25. Shim J, Yoon M, Lee Y. Feasibility of newly designed fast non local means (FNLM)-based noise reduction filter for X-ray imaging: A simulation study. Optik. 2018 May 1;160:124-30.
  26. Konst B, Nøtthellen J, Naess SN, Båth M. Novel method to determine recursive filtration and noise reduction in fluoroscopic imaging – a comparison of four different vendors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics. 2021 Jan;22(1):281-92.
  27. Hatt CR, Oh AS, Obuchowski NA, Charbonnier J-P, Lynch DA, Humphries SM. Comparison of CT lung density measurements between standard full-dose and reduced-dose protocols. Radiology: Cardiothoracic Imaging. 2021 Apr;3(2).
  28. Wittenberg R, Peters JF, Sonnemans JJ, Bipat S, Prokop M, Schaefer-Prokop CM. Impact of image quality on the performance of computer-aided detection of pulmonary embolism. American Journal of Roentgenology . 2011;196(1):95-101.
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 19, Issue 6
November and December 2022
Pages 363-370

  • Receive Date 28 August 2021
  • Revise Date 19 January 2022
  • Accept Date 25 January 2022