Loading…
Abstract ID: 159 Contribution of coherent and incoherent scatter in grating-based phase-contrast imaging
Grating-based phase-contrast imaging (GB-PCI) is a recent development in X-ray imaging. Using three gratings, a highly periodic intensity pattern is created and measured. The amplitude (visibility) of this pattern is an important system parameter that determines image quality and scatter degrades th...
Saved in:
Published in: | Physica medica 2017-10, Vol.42, p.33-34 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Grating-based phase-contrast imaging (GB-PCI) is a recent development in X-ray imaging. Using three gratings, a highly periodic intensity pattern is created and measured. The amplitude (visibility) of this pattern is an important system parameter that determines image quality and scatter degrades this system visibility. Two GB-PCI setup aspects are expected to reduce the scatter fraction in the image: grating G2 can be considered an anti-scatter grid while large object-to-detector distances (D) will limit large angle scatter contributions. The aim was to quantify the efficiency with which these two aspects reduce both coherent and incoherent scatter in GB-PCI.
PENELOPE Monte Carlo simulations were used with a realistic GB-PCI imaging geometry: gratings G1 and G2 had pitches of 4 and 2μm, respectively, heights of 35 and 26μm and duty cycles of 0.5. The trenches of the silicon gratings were filled with air in G1 and gold in G2. The G1-to-detector distance was 4.53cm, while G2 was fixed to the detector. A 40kVp X-ray tube was simulated in a plane wave geometry. Three different cases were evaluated for two objects, a finger imaged in air and a 5cm thick PMMA slab. Case 1 had G2 in place and D was 9.5cm, G2 was removed for case 2 and D was 9.5cm, while case 3 had G2 removed and D was 4cm.
Coherent scatter-to-primary ratio (SPRcoh) for the finger was 1.63%, 0.56% and 0.77% for cases 1,2,3 respectively. Similarly the incoherent SPR (SPRincoh) was 0.29%, 0.20% and 0.67%. For the PMMA slab, SPRcoh was 6.65%, 7.67% and 10.50% for cases 1, 2 and 3, while SPRincoh was respectively 2.26%, 3.05% and 7.86%. The uncertainty was |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1120-1797 1724-191X |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.09.083 |