International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Volume/Issue:
Volume 12: Issue 2
An application of filtered back projection method for computed tomography images
Author:
Tuğba Özge Onur Electrical-Electronics Engineering, Bülent Ecevit University, 67100 Zonguldak, Turkey

Search for other papers by Tuğba Özge Onur in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8736-2615
Pages:
194–200
Online Publication Date:
02 Apr 2021
Publication Date:
29 May 2021
Article Category:
Research Article
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1556/1848.2021.00231
Keywords (English):
reconstruction; computed tomography (CT) imaging; filtered back projection algorithm (FBP); image enhancement
Open access

Abstract

Mathematical methods take an important part in reconstruction technologies of radiographic image. Back projection, iterative, and analytical (Two-dimensional Fourier, Filtered Back Projection) methods are the most important procedures for image reconstruction. Whenever there exists numerous projections, analytical methods have a great performance in speed and accuracy and due to these advantages they are comprehensively used for X-ray imaging. One of the widespread used methods in tomographic image reconstruction is Filtered Back Projection (FBP) algorithm. This paper presents an application of this reconstruction algorithm for a generated image of the object. Shepp-Logan filter is used to form the filtered back projection image and performance improvement is investigated. The obtained images indicate that FBP algorithm can be substantial for various applications in the field of medicine and industry.

Abstract

Mathematical methods take an important part in reconstruction technologies of radiographic image. Back projection, iterative, and analytical (Two-dimensional Fourier, Filtered Back Projection) methods are the most important procedures for image reconstruction. Whenever there exists numerous projections, analytical methods have a great performance in speed and accuracy and due to these advantages they are comprehensively used for X-ray imaging. One of the widespread used methods in tomographic image reconstruction is Filtered Back Projection (FBP) algorithm. This paper presents an application of this reconstruction algorithm for a generated image of the object. Shepp-Logan filter is used to form the filtered back projection image and performance improvement is investigated. The obtained images indicate that FBP algorithm can be substantial for various applications in the field of medicine and industry.

1 Introduction

Computed tomography (CT) is a noninvasive medical procedure and it produces cross-sectional images of the body by using specialized X-ray equipment. Each cross-sectional image representing a “slice” of the imaged person is used for various therapeutic and diagnostic purposes. EMI Ltd. presented the first computerized commercial tomography of X-rays in medical applications, and a great impact was achieved on radiological diagnosis by means of it [1, 2]. Thereafter, another mathematical technique for image reconstruction by means of projections was presented and tomography was developed [3]. Based on the experiments performed, a coefficient matrix related to the slice sections was proposed by measuring X-rays transmission widthwise an object at various angles and acquiring images of cross sections [4]. Thus, CT is accepted as an efficient tool to examine the interior features of the object and it is important to obtain high quality images [5]. Image reconstruction has major effects on image quality and therefore on radiation dose. For a given radiation dose, it is preferable to reconstruct minimal noisy images without disturbing image accuracy and spatial resolution.

Reconstructions that enhance image quality can reduce radiation dose, since lower dose can be used to reconstruct the same quality images. In addition, if a CT scan is indicated clinically, the techniques that reduce dose are necessary. There have been various dose reducing techniques such as tube current modulation [6], organ-specific care [7], beam-shaping filters [8] and CT parameters optimizations [9]. The combination of some CT parameters such as thickness of slice, reconstruction filters, rotation numbers, etc. affects the quality of the image even if the delivered radiation dose to the patients is the same. Therefore, algebraic reconstruction technique (ART) which is an iterative method was preferred for the reconstruction of CT images [10].

However, all the mentioned methods for image reconstruction present in the literature have some inadequacies, for example iteration methods suffer from poor computation speed and convergence accuracy in presence of noise [11]. Fourier techniques are direct but require two-dimensional inverse transform, interpolations and coordinate transformations [12]. Because of these deficiencies, an alternative method with computational advantages for image reconstruction has been sought and back projection and filtered back projection (FBP) algorithms have been proposed [13].

It is important to investigate the reconstruction of CT images, because CT imaging is widely used in various areas for treatment and diagnostics due to its ability to image the anatomical details. Also, advantages such as high spatial resolution and slice selection in any direction make CT imaging preferable. In addition, as it can be concluded from the present researches, high diagnostic quality CT images can be achieved by using FBP in most circumstances.

Although there have been some researches which claim that the quality of the CT scan images reconstructed by using FBP technique deteriorates with the increasing obesity rates [14], it has still major benefit with the shorter reconstruction duration. In other respects, although some other studies present that radiation dose can be reduced further with some other approches compared to FBP [15], they still fail to detect low contrast lesions [16]. Therefore, in this paper, reconstruction implementation is performed on a generated image by using FBP algorithm and the enhancement for the image quality is investigated by using a Shepp-Logan filter to filter the projections. There have been various studies in the literature and a comparison of these works is summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Relevant studies dealing with FBP for the types of different images

AuthorsPurpose of the studyUsed methodImage type
Qi and Chen (2008) [17]To investigate the reconstruction performance for differential phase-contrast computed tomographyFBP algorithmDifferential phase-contrast computed tomography (DPC-CT)
Al Hussani and Al Hayani (2014) [18]To evaluate the performance of Ram Lak filter and Hann window for the reconstruction of a head phantomFBP algorithmCT head phantom
Willeming et al. (2014) [19]To compare the image quality of reconstructed CT imagesFBP algorithm, Adaptive Statistical Iterative ReconstructionCT images
Sauter et al. (2016) [20]To compare the performances on detecting pulmonary embolism in CT pulmonary angiographyFBP algorithm, Iterative Model ReconstructionCT pulmonary angiography (CTPA)
Ramadhan et al. (2018) [21]To compare the performance on detecting cancers or tumorsFBP algorithm, Algebraic Reconstruction Technique (ART)Artificial tissue models
Willemink and Noël (2019) [22]To evaluate the CT image reconstructionFBP algorithm, Artificial intelligence methodsCT images

For instance, Qi and Chen have proposed a FBP algorithm to reconstruct the DPC-CT images. They conducted various simulations and verified the accuracy of the proposed reconstruction algorithm [17]. Al Hussani and Al Hayani applied FBP on CT scanner and tried to reconstruct head phantom image. They saw that FBP algorithm is an efficient and useful method for reconstructing CT images. They also decided that the back projection calculations can be reduced by using different filter types [18]. Willeming et al. evaluated the reconstructed image quality of CT images for FBP and Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction algorithms and used Shepp-Logan filter for FBP algorithm [19]. Sauter et al. compared the pulmonary embolism detectability of FBP and Iterative Model Reconstruction algorithms and used Shepp-Logan filter for FBP algorithm [20]. Ramadhan et al. proposed a comparative study between FBP algorithm and Algebraic Reconstruction Technique to detect the cancers or tumors from artificial tissue models. They showed that FBP algorithm provides better results than Algebraic Reconstruction Technique due to the noise calculation in Algebraic Reconstruction Technique. In recent studies, artificial intelligence has gained interest in the reconstruction of medical images. Willemink and Noël proposed a review of CT image reconstruction for FBP algorithm and artificial intelligence methods. They claim although huge data sets are necessary for artificial intelligence methods, they will play a major role in medical image reconstruction processes in the near future.

The difference of this study from related studies in the literature is that synthetic or real data is not used in this study. In addition, the original input image is produced in MATLAB 2018b program and the projections of the object are used to reconstruct it by using the FBP algorithm. The reason of using Shepp-Logan filter in the filtering process is that it demonstrates superior performance for both synthetic and real images in the research presented by Prabhat et al. in 2012 [23]. In addition, Hann filtering, which is one of the other preferred filter types, is also used to compare the performance of Shepp-Logan filter.

In Section 2, the detailed information about FBP algorithm and Shepp-Logan filter is reviewed. Section 3 is devoted to the framework of the reconstruction model and simulation results. The generated test image, reconstruction process, spatial impulse response and transfer functions of the used Shepp-Logan and Hann filters and the back projections and filtered back projections of the object are presented. Finally, in Section 4, the concluding remark is included.

2 Background

2.1 FBP algorithm

If f(x,y) and p(t,θ) are considered as the image slice and projections set, respectively, for the image reconstruction f(x,y) is estimated from p(t,θ). In CT, in order to obtain image reconstruction, several algorithms have been used. FBP algorithm is most widely used for the reconstruction of an object from its X-ray projections [24]. Since each projection is considered only once, FBP provides fast computing.

If a single projection is handled, the two-dimensional Fourier transform of this object is obtained by means of Central Slice Theorem in this projection. In accordance with this theorem, the one-dimensional Fourier transform of the projection of a two-dimensional function f(x,y) is equal to a line through the origin of the two-dimensional Fourier transform of the same function [25]. Thus, a simple reconstruction can be performed if the proper places for Fourier transform values of this projection are selected in this process, the other projections are assumed to be zero.

By using two dimensional inverse Fourier transform, the object function is defined in Eq. (1) [26],
f(x, y)=∫−∞∞∫−∞∞F(u, v)ej2π(ux+vy)dudv,
where u and v variables represent rectangular coordinate system. If rectangular coordinate system in Eq. (1) is replaced with polar coordinate system, new coordinate system and differentials can be defined as in Eq. (2) [26],
u=wcosθ, v=wsinθ, dudv=wdwdθ.
By using Eqs (1) and (2), the inverse Fourier transform can be defined as,
f(x, y)=∫02π∫0∞F(w, θ)ej2πw(xcosθ+ysinθ)wdwdθ+∫0π∫0∞F(w, θ+180°)ej2πw[xcos(θ+180°)+ysin(θ+180°)]wdwdθ
and with symmetry property F(w, θ+180°)=F(−w, θ), Eq. (3) can be simplified as given in Eq. (4),
f(x, y)=∫0π[∫−∞∞F(w, θ)|w|ej2πwtdw]dθ,
where t = xcosθ + ysinθ. In order to provide convenience, the Fourier transform of the projection obtained at θ angle can be given by,
f(x, y)=∫0π[∫−∞∞Sθ|w|ej2πwtdw]dθ
Equation (5) includes a filtering process where |w| term represents the frequency response of the filter. Therefore, this process is called as filtered projection. Thus, Eq. (5) can be considered in the form as,
f(x, y)=∫0πQθ(xcosθ+ysinθ)dθ,
where
Qθ(t)=∫−∞∞Sθ(w)|w|ej2πwtdw.
By regarding Eq. (6), in order to estimate f(x,y) for the different angles projections in the discrete form,
f(x, y)=πN∑i=1nQθİ(xcosθi+ysinθi)
can be used where N is the number of θi angles for the projections. By taking into consideration the equations given in (1)–(8), The FBP algorithm can be summarized as given in the following:

  • Acquire projections from object.

  • Take one dimensional Fourier transform and apply |w| filter.

  • Find inverse one dimensional Fourier transform.

  • Back Project result.

By examining Eqs (1)–(8) and the summary of the FBP algorithm, it can be seen that only one dimensional Fourier transform is used and therefore less computations are needed.

There are several frequency domain filters which are commonly used for filtering process in the FBP algorithm [27–29]. Even though there are a number of filters, it is an important issue to select the optimal filter for a robust image reconstruction. Some of the filters which are used are;

  • Ramanathan-Lakshminarayan (Ram-Lak): It is a ramp filter that is sensitive to noise.

  • Shepp-Logan: It is obtained by the multiplication of the Ram-Lak filter and a “sinc” function.

  • Cosine: It is obtained by the multiplication of the Ram-Lak filter and a cosine function.

  • Hamming: It is obtained by the multiplication of the Ram-Lak filter and a Hamming window.

  • Hann: It is obtained by the multiplication of the Ram-Lak filter and a Hann window.

In this paper, Shepp-Logan filter is proposed to realize the filtering process given in Eq. (7). In addition, Hann filter, which is another filtering frequently preferred in the literature due to its superiority, is used to provide a performance comparison [30].

2.2 Shepp-Logan filter

Back projection of f(x,y) at θ angles is the same as generating a line over the origin of the two dimensional Fourier space. Back projection causes higher density in the regions close to the origin, lower density farther than the origin, correspondingly higher spatial frequencies are suppressed by means of 1/|w|. Thus, a low-pass filtered version of the image is formed. However, a |w| filter can improve it. For this purpose, Shepp-Logan filter, which is obtained by the multiplication of the Ram-Lak filter and sinc function, can be used [31].

3 Model and simulation

In this paper, the projections of the object are used to reconstruct it by using the FBP algorithm. A blurred reconstructed object is formed by using simple back projection. To eliminate this blur, a Shepp-Logan filter is used to filter the projections. The MATLAB 2018b simulation program is preferred for the programming of the proposed process. Test image is generated in MATLAB 2018b as shown in Fig. 1. Thereafter original input image is generated, FBP algorithm is applied with the steps given in Section 2.1. Figure 2 demonstrates the reconstruction process block diagram.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.

Original input image

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 12, 2; 10.1556/1848.2021.00231

Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.

The reconstruction process

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 12, 2; 10.1556/1848.2021.00231

However, it can be considered that there are some assumptions such as size of the image, projections number, theta angle increment that effect the robustness of the algorithm, consequently the image quality. These parameters are determined by trials on the simulation. Increments of the theta angle is decided to be 5° degrees in the interval [0° 180°]. Shepp-Logan and Hann filters are used for performing filtering processes. Each one of these projections will be weighted using these filters which prevent blurry images for back projection method [31]. The ramp filter will be multiplied by sinc function in Shepp-Logan filter. Figure 3a and b show the spatial impulse responses and the transfer functions of the used Shepp-Logan and Hanning filters, respectively.

Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.

Spatial impulse response and transfer function of the used filters a) Shepp-Logan filter b) Hann filter

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 12, 2; 10.1556/1848.2021.00231

By using Eq. (8), the reconstructed object can be obtained by means of filtered projections. The acquired data of the back projection and FBP algorithm for 37 projections of an input test image are shown in Fig. 4. Figure 4a, b and c show the obtained results of the back projection and filtered back projections of object for Shepp-Logan and Hann filters, respectively.

Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.

Back projection and filtered back projections of object for 37 projections. a) Back projection b) Shepp-Logan filtered back projections c)Hann filtered back projections

Citation: International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering 12, 2; 10.1556/1848.2021.00231

In the plot of Fig. 4, number of projections are chosen to provide the best quality for the image. Also, the step size and image size are determined with trials by taking into account the relationship of the performance with these parameters [32]. It can be seen in Fig. 4 that while the object is not very clear in back projection of the object, it is more distinct and less blurred in the filtered back projection one by using Shepp-Logan filter. In addition, it can be clearly seen from Fig. 4c that when back projection of object is filtered by using Hann filter, the object is no longer noticeable and more blurred and bright back projection is obtained with 37 projections.

4 Conclusion

FBP algorithm can be considered as a useful and effective reconstruction method for CT images. In this paper, a test image is formed by using MATLAB simulation program and reconstruction performance is investigated, however, it will be the most important part of the real time scanning process specially in medical applications because the radiation time the patient is exposed should be as short as possible. For this purpose in this paper, the filtering performances of Shepp-Logan and Hann filters are compared. According to the obtained results, the usage of Shepp-Logan filter both reduces the back projection calculations and enhances the quality of the reconstructed image. In other respects, it provides less blurred image. Furthermore, the effect of the noise in the filtered back projection image given in Fig. 4b, can be decreased by using other types of windows before filtering the projections. It can be considered as a future issue by using different types of filters and windows together in order to investigate the enhancement in the quality of the image.

References

  • [1]

    O. Kulak, H. G. Goren, and A. Supciller, “A new multi criteria decision making approach for medical imaging systems considering risk factors,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 35, pp. 931–941, 2015.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    R. E. Alexander and R. B. Gunderman, “EMI and the first CT scanner,” J. Am. Coll. Radiol., vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 778–781, 2010.

  • [3]↑

    A. M. Cormack, “Representation of a foundation by its line with some radiological application,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 2722–2727, 1963.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]↑

    E. Seeram, Computed Tomography: Physical Principles, Clinical Applications, and Quality Control. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2015.

  • [5]↑

    L. W. Goldman, “Principles of CT and CT technology,” J. Nucl. Med. Technol., vol. 35, pp. 115–128, 2008.

  • [6]↑

    W. A. Kalender, H. Wolf, and C. Suess, “Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. II. Phantom measurements,” Med. Phys., vol. 26, pp. 2248–2253, 1999.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]↑

    S. V. Vollmar and W. A. Kalender, “Reduction of dose to the female breast in thoracic CT: a comparison of standard-protocol, bismuth-shielded, partial and tube-current-modulated CT examinations,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 18, pp. 1674–1682, 2008.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]↑

    M. Weis, T. Henzler, J. W. Nance Jr, et al., “Radiation dose comparison between 70 kVp and 100 kVp with spectral beam shaping for non-contrast-enhanced pediatric chest computed tomography: a prospective randomized controlled study,” Invest. Radiol., vol. 52, pp. 155–162, 2017.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]↑

    S. Abbas, T. Lee, S. Shin, R. Lee, and S. Cho, “Effects of sparse sampling schemes on image quality in low-dose CT,” Med. Phys., vol. 40, pp. 111915, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]↑

    D. Fleischmann and F. E. Boas, “Computed tomography–old ideas and new technology,” Eur. Radiol., vol 21, pp. 510–517, 2011.

  • [11]↑

    R. Gordon, R. Bender, and G. T. Herman, “Algebraic reconstruction techniques (ART) for three-dimensional electron microscopy and X-ray photography,” J. Theor. Biol., vol. 29, pp. 471–481, 1970.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]↑

    R. C. Gonzales, Digital Image Processing. Pearson-Prentice Hill, 2008.

  • [13]↑

    L. A. Feldkamp, L. C. Davis, and J. W. Kress, “Practical cone-beam algorithm,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, vol. 1, pp. 612–619, 1984.

  • [14]↑

    M. Ng, T. Fleming, M. Robinson, et al., “Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013,” Lancet, vol. 384, pp. 766–781, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]↑

    A. Sauter, T. Koehler, A. A. Fingerle, et al., “Ultra low dose CT pulmonary angiography with iterative reconstruction,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. e0162716, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]↑

    A. M. Den Harder, M. J. Willemink, Q. M. De Ruiter, et al., “Dose reduction with iterative reconstruction for coronary CT angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Br. J. Radiol., vol. 89, no. 1058, pp. 20150068, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]↑

    Z. Qi and G. H. Chen,”Direct fan beam reconstruction algorithm via filtered backprojection for differential phase-contrast computed tomography,” X-Ray Opt. Instrum., vol. 2008, pp. 1–8, 2008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]↑

    M. T. Al Hussani and M. H. A. Al Hayyani, “The use of filtered back projection algorithm for reconstruction of tomographic image,” NUCEJ, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 151–156, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]↑

    M. J. Willemink, R. A. P. Takx, P. A. de Jong, et al., “Computed tomography radiation dose reduction: effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on image quality,” J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 815–823, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]↑

    A. Sauter, T. Koehler, A. A. Fingerle, et al. “Ultra low dose CT pulmonary angiography with iterative reconstruction,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. e0162716, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]↑

    R. Ramadhan, R. G. Rian Gilang Prabowo, R. Ria Aprilliyani, and Y. Basari, “Comparison analysis between filtered back projection and algebraic reconstruction technique on microwave imaging,” In AIP Conference Proceedings 1933, 040011-1-9, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]↑

    M. J. Willemink and P. B. Noël, “The evaluation of image reconstruction for CT-from filtered back projection to artificial intelligence,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 29, pp. 2185–2195, 2019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [23]↑

    P. Prabhat, S. Arumugam, and V. K. Madan, “Filtering in filtered backprojection computerized tomography,” In Proceedings of the National Conference “NCNTE-2012,” pp. 4–7, 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [24]↑

    A. A. Farag, Biomedical Image Analysis: Statistical and Variational Methods. Cambridge University Press, 2014.

  • [25]↑

    T. G. Feeman, The Mathematics of Medical Imaging: A Beginner’s Guide. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.

  • [26]↑

    J You, G. L. Zeng, and Z. Liang, “FBP algorithms for attenuated fan-beam projections,” Inverse Probl., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1801, 2005.

  • [27]

    G. Zeng, Medical Image Reconstruction: A Conceptual Tutorial. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.

  • [28]

    P. Sánchez-Juan, M. P. W. A. Houben, J. I. Hoff, et al., “The first case of variant creutzfeldt-jakob disease in the Netherlands,” J. Neurol., vol. 254, no. 7, pp. 958–960, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    J. M. Gelfand, J. L. Duncan, C. A. Racine, et al., “Heterogeneous patterns of tissue injury in NARP syndrome,” J. Neurol., vol. 258, no. 3, pp. 440–448, 2011.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]↑

    Z. Qiao, G. Redler, B. Epel, and H. J. Halpern, “Comparison of parabolic filtration methods for 3D filtered back projection in pulsed EPR imaging,” J. Magn. Reson., vol. 248, pp. 42–53, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [31]↑

    J. L. Semmlow and B. Griffel. Biosignal and Medical Image Processing. CRC Press, 2014.

  • [32]↑

    H. Shi and S. Luo, “A novel scheme to design the filter for CT reconstruction using FBP algorithm,” BioMedical Eng. OnLine, vol. 12, no. 50, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [1]

    O. Kulak, H. G. Goren, and A. Supciller, “A new multi criteria decision making approach for medical imaging systems considering risk factors,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 35, pp. 931–941, 2015.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [2]

    R. E. Alexander and R. B. Gunderman, “EMI and the first CT scanner,” J. Am. Coll. Radiol., vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 778–781, 2010.

  • [3]

    A. M. Cormack, “Representation of a foundation by its line with some radiological application,” J. Appl. Phys., vol. 34, no. 9, pp. 2722–2727, 1963.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [4]

    E. Seeram, Computed Tomography: Physical Principles, Clinical Applications, and Quality Control. Elsevier Health Sciences. 2015.

  • [5]

    L. W. Goldman, “Principles of CT and CT technology,” J. Nucl. Med. Technol., vol. 35, pp. 115–128, 2008.

  • [6]

    W. A. Kalender, H. Wolf, and C. Suess, “Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation. II. Phantom measurements,” Med. Phys., vol. 26, pp. 2248–2253, 1999.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [7]

    S. V. Vollmar and W. A. Kalender, “Reduction of dose to the female breast in thoracic CT: a comparison of standard-protocol, bismuth-shielded, partial and tube-current-modulated CT examinations,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 18, pp. 1674–1682, 2008.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [8]

    M. Weis, T. Henzler, J. W. Nance Jr, et al., “Radiation dose comparison between 70 kVp and 100 kVp with spectral beam shaping for non-contrast-enhanced pediatric chest computed tomography: a prospective randomized controlled study,” Invest. Radiol., vol. 52, pp. 155–162, 2017.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [9]

    S. Abbas, T. Lee, S. Shin, R. Lee, and S. Cho, “Effects of sparse sampling schemes on image quality in low-dose CT,” Med. Phys., vol. 40, pp. 111915, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [10]

    D. Fleischmann and F. E. Boas, “Computed tomography–old ideas and new technology,” Eur. Radiol., vol 21, pp. 510–517, 2011.

  • [11]

    R. Gordon, R. Bender, and G. T. Herman, “Algebraic reconstruction techniques (ART) for three-dimensional electron microscopy and X-ray photography,” J. Theor. Biol., vol. 29, pp. 471–481, 1970.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [12]

    R. C. Gonzales, Digital Image Processing. Pearson-Prentice Hill, 2008.

  • [13]

    L. A. Feldkamp, L. C. Davis, and J. W. Kress, “Practical cone-beam algorithm,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A, vol. 1, pp. 612–619, 1984.

  • [14]

    M. Ng, T. Fleming, M. Robinson, et al., “Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013,” Lancet, vol. 384, pp. 766–781, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [15]

    A. Sauter, T. Koehler, A. A. Fingerle, et al., “Ultra low dose CT pulmonary angiography with iterative reconstruction,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. e0162716, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [16]

    A. M. Den Harder, M. J. Willemink, Q. M. De Ruiter, et al., “Dose reduction with iterative reconstruction for coronary CT angiography: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” Br. J. Radiol., vol. 89, no. 1058, pp. 20150068, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [17]

    Z. Qi and G. H. Chen,”Direct fan beam reconstruction algorithm via filtered backprojection for differential phase-contrast computed tomography,” X-Ray Opt. Instrum., vol. 2008, pp. 1–8, 2008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [18]

    M. T. Al Hussani and M. H. A. Al Hayyani, “The use of filtered back projection algorithm for reconstruction of tomographic image,” NUCEJ, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 151–156, 2014.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [19]

    M. J. Willemink, R. A. P. Takx, P. A. de Jong, et al., “Computed tomography radiation dose reduction: effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on image quality,” J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr., vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 815–823, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [20]

    A. Sauter, T. Koehler, A. A. Fingerle, et al. “Ultra low dose CT pulmonary angiography with iterative reconstruction,” PLoS One, vol. 11, no. 9, pp. e0162716, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [21]

    R. Ramadhan, R. G. Rian Gilang Prabowo, R. Ria Aprilliyani, and Y. Basari, “Comparison analysis between filtered back projection and algebraic reconstruction technique on microwave imaging,” In AIP Conference Proceedings 1933, 040011-1-9, 2018.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [22]

    M. J. Willemink and P. B. Noël, “The evaluation of image reconstruction for CT-from filtered back projection to artificial intelligence,” Eur. Radiol., vol. 29, pp. 2185–2195, 2019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [23]

    P. Prabhat, S. Arumugam, and V. K. Madan, “Filtering in filtered backprojection computerized tomography,” In Proceedings of the National Conference “NCNTE-2012,” pp. 4–7, 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [24]

    A. A. Farag, Biomedical Image Analysis: Statistical and Variational Methods. Cambridge University Press, 2014.

  • [25]

    T. G. Feeman, The Mathematics of Medical Imaging: A Beginner’s Guide. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.

  • [26]

    J You, G. L. Zeng, and Z. Liang, “FBP algorithms for attenuated fan-beam projections,” Inverse Probl., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1801, 2005.

  • [27]

    G. Zeng, Medical Image Reconstruction: A Conceptual Tutorial. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010.

  • [28]

    P. Sánchez-Juan, M. P. W. A. Houben, J. I. Hoff, et al., “The first case of variant creutzfeldt-jakob disease in the Netherlands,” J. Neurol., vol. 254, no. 7, pp. 958–960, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [29]

    J. M. Gelfand, J. L. Duncan, C. A. Racine, et al., “Heterogeneous patterns of tissue injury in NARP syndrome,” J. Neurol., vol. 258, no. 3, pp. 440–448, 2011.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [30]

    Z. Qiao, G. Redler, B. Epel, and H. J. Halpern, “Comparison of parabolic filtration methods for 3D filtered back projection in pulsed EPR imaging,” J. Magn. Reson., vol. 248, pp. 42–53, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • [31]

    J. L. Semmlow and B. Griffel. Biosignal and Medical Image Processing. CRC Press, 2014.

  • [32]

    H. Shi and S. Luo, “A novel scheme to design the filter for CT reconstruction using FBP algorithm,” BioMedical Eng. OnLine, vol. 12, no. 50, 2013.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Print ISSN:
2062-0810
Online ISSN:
2063-4269
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
Submit Your Manuscript
 

Senior editors

Editor-in-Chief: Ákos, Lakatos University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Founder, former Editor-in-Chief (2011-2020): Ferenc Kalmár University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Founding Editor: György Csomós University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Associate Editor: Derek Clements Croome University of Reading (UK)

Associate Editor: Dezső Beke University of Debrecen (Hungary)

Editorial Board

  • Mohammad Nazir AHMAD Institute of Visual Informatics, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Malaysia

    Murat BAKIROV Center for Materials and Lifetime Management Ltd. Moscow Russia

    Nicolae BALC Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Umberto BERARDI Ryerson University Toronto Canada

    Ildikó BODNÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Sándor BODZÁS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Fatih Mehmet BOTSALI Selçuk University Konya Turkey

    Samuel BRUNNER Empa Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology

    István BUDAI University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Constantin BUNGAU University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Shanshan CAI Huazhong University of Science and Technology Wuhan China

    Michele De CARLI University of Padua Padua Italy

    Robert CERNY Czech Technical University in Prague Czech Republic

    György CSOMÓS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Tamás CSOKNYAI Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Eugen Ioan GERGELY University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    József FINTA University of Pécs Pécs Hungary

    Anna FORMICA IASI National Research Council Rome

    Alexandru GACSADI University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Eric A. GRULKE University of Kentucky Lexington United States

    Janez GRUM University of Ljubljana Ljubljana Slovenia

    Géza HUSI University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Ghaleb A. HUSSEINI American University of Sharjah Sharjah United Arab Emirates

    Nikolay IVANOV Peter the Great St.Petersburg Polytechnic University St. Petersburg Russia

    Antal JÁRAI Eötvös Loránd University Budapest Hungary

    Gudni JÓHANNESSON The National Energy Authority of Iceland Reykjavik Iceland

    László KAJTÁR Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Ferenc KALMÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Tünde KALMÁR University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Milos KALOUSEK Brno University of Technology Brno Czech Republik

    Jan KOCI Czech Technical University in Prague Prague Czech Republic

    Vaclav KOCI Czech Technical University in Prague Prague Czech Republic

    Imra KOCSIS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Imre KOVÁCS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Angela Daniela LA ROSA Norwegian University of Science and Technology

    Éva LOVRA Univeqrsity of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Elena LUCCHI Eurac Research, Institute for Renewable Energy Bolzano Italy

    Tamás MANKOVITS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Igor MEDVED Slovak Technical University in Bratislava Bratislava Slovakia

    Ligia MOGA Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Marco MOLINARI Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm Sweden

    Henrieta MORAVCIKOVA Slovak Academy of Sciences Bratislava Slovakia

    Phalguni MUKHOPHADYAYA University of Victoria Victoria Canada

    Balázs NAGY Budapest University of Technology and Economics Budapest Hungary

    Husam S. NAJM Rutgers University New Brunswick United States

    Jozsef NYERS Subotica Tech College of Applied Sciences Subotica Serbia

    Bjarne W. OLESEN Technical University of Denmark Lyngby Denmark

    Stefan ONIGA North University of Baia Mare Baia Mare Romania

    Joaquim Norberto PIRES Universidade de Coimbra Coimbra Portugal

    László POKORÁDI Óbuda University Budapest Hungary

    Antal PUHL University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Roman RABENSEIFER Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava Bratislava Slovak Republik

    Mohammad H. A. SALAH Hashemite University Zarqua Jordan

    Dietrich SCHMIDT Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy and Energy System Technology IWES Kassel Germany

    Lorand SZABÓ Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Csaba SZÁSZ Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Cluj-Napoca Romania

    Ioan SZÁVA Transylvania University of Brasov Brasov Romania

    Péter SZEMES University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Edit SZŰCS University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Radu TARCA University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Zsolt TIBA University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    László TÓTH University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    László TÖRÖK University of Debrecen Debrecen Hungary

    Anton TRNIK Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra Nitra Slovakia

    Ibrahim UZMAY Erciyes University Kayseri Turkey

    Tibor VESSELÉNYI University of Oradea Oradea Romania

    Nalinaksh S. VYAS Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur India

    Deborah WHITE The University of Adelaide Adelaide Australia

    Sahin YILDIRIM Erciyes University Kayseri Turkey

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Address of the institute: Faculty of Engineering, University of Debrecen
H-4028 Debrecen, Ótemető u. 2-4. Hungary
Email: irase@eng.unideb.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • DOAJ
  • ERIH PLUS
  • Google Scholar
  • ProQuest
  • SCOPUS
  • Ulrich's Periodicals Directory

 

2022  
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index		 9
Scimago
Journal Rank		 0.235
Scimago Quartile Score Architecture (Q2)
Engineering (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Environmental Engineering (Q3)
Information Systems (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score		 1.6
Scopus
CIte Score Rank		 Architecture 46/170 (73rd PCTL)
General Engineering 174/302 (42nd PCTL)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 93/150 (38th PCTL)
Environmental Engineering 123/184 (33rd PCTL)
Management Science and Operations Research 142/198 (28th PCTL)
Information Systems 281/379 (25th PCTL)		  
Scopus
SNIP		 0.686

2021  
Scimago  
Scimago
H-index		 7
Scimago
Journal Rank		 0,199
Scimago Quartile Score Engineering (miscellaneous) (Q3)
Environmental Engineering (Q4)
Information Systems (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) (Q4)
Scopus  
Scopus
Cite Score		 1,2
Scopus
CIte Score Rank		 Architecture 48/149 (Q2)
General Engineering 186/300 (Q3)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 79/124 (Q3)
Environmental Engineering 118/173 (Q3)
Management Science and Operations Research 141/184 (Q4)
Information Systems 274/353 (Q4)
Scopus
SNIP		 0,457

2020  
Scimago
H-index		 5
Scimago
Journal Rank		 0,165
Scimago
Quartile Score		 Engineering (miscellaneous) Q3
Environmental Engineering Q4
Information Systems Q4
Management Science and Operations Research Q4
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q4
Scopus
Cite Score		 102/116=0,9
Scopus
Cite Score Rank		 General Engineering 205/297 (Q3)
Environmental Engineering 107/146 (Q3)
Information Systems 269/329 (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research 139/166 (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 64/98 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP		 0,26
Scopus
Cites		 57
Scopus
Documents		 36
Days from submission to acceptance 84
Days from acceptance to publication 348
Acceptance
Rate

23%

 

2019  
Scimago
H-index		 4
Scimago
Journal Rank		 0,229
Scimago
Quartile Score		 Engineering (miscellaneous) Q2
Environmental Engineering Q3
Information Systems Q3
Management Science and Operations Research Q4
Materials Science (miscellaneous) Q3
Scopus
Cite Score		 46/81=0,6
Scopus
Cite Score Rank		 General Engineering 227/299 (Q4)
Environmental Engineering 107/132 (Q4)
Information Systems 259/300 (Q4)
Management Science and Operations Research 136/161 (Q4)
Materials Science (miscellaneous) 60/86 (Q3)
Scopus
SNIP		 0,866
Scopus
Cites		 35
Scopus
Documents		 47
Acceptance
Rate		 21%

 

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 1100 EUR/article
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Limited number of full waiver available. Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription Information Gold Open Access

International Review of Applied Sciences and Engineering
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation		 2010
Volumes
per Year		 1
Issues
per Year		 3
Founder Debreceni Egyetem
Founder's
Address		 H-4032 Debrecen, Hungary Egyetem tér 1
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher		 Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2062-0810 (Print)
ISSN 2063-4269 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2023 0 59 46
Jul 2023 0 58 29
Aug 2023 0 126 43
Sep 2023 0 76 36
Oct 2023 0 145 51
Nov 2023 0 99 50
Dec 2023 0 38 3