Prediction of Perceptible Artifacts in JPEG2000 Compressed Abdomen CT Images Using a Perceptual Image Quality Metric

Academic Radiology

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 314-325

  Kim, Bohyoung ^a,b   Lee, Kyoung Ho ^a,b   Kim, Kil Joong ^a,b   Mantiuk, Rafal ^c   Bajpai, Vasundhara ^a,b   Kim, Tae Jung ^a,b   Kim, Young Hoon ^a,b   Yoon, Chang Jin ^a,b   Hahn, Seokyung ^d  

^a Seoul National University Bundang Hospital   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR INFORMATICS   (Germany)

^d Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Abdomen CT; compression; human visual system; image quality metric

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADULT; AGED; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MCNEMAR TEST; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; STUDENT T TEST; VISUAL THRESHOLD;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; ARTIFACTS; DATA COMPRESSION; FEMALE; FORECASTING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 39049132947     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2007.10.018     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Erickson B.J., Manduca A., Palisson P., et al. Wavelet compression of medical images. Radiology 206 (1998) 599-607
2. Schomer D.F., Elekes A.A., Hazle J.D., et al. Introduction to wavelet-based compression of medical images. Radiographics 18 (1998) 469-481
3. Bak P.R.G. Will the use of irreversible compression become a standard of practice?. http://www.scarnet.org/pdf/SCARNews_Winter06.pdf Accessed July 28, 2006
4. Lee K.H., Lee H.J., Kim J.H., et al. Managing the CT data explosion: initial experiences of archiving volumetric datasets in a mini-PACS. J Digit Imaging 18 (2005) 188-195
5. Rubin G.D. Data explosion: the challenge of multidetector-row CT. Eur J Radiol 36 (2000) 74-80
6. Tamm E.P., Thompson S., Venable S.L., and McEnery K. Impact of multislice CT on PACS resources. J Digit Imaging 15 Suppl 1 (2002) 96-101
7. Cosman P.C., Davidson H.C., Bergin C.J., et al. Thoracic CT images: effect of lossy image compression on diagnostic accuracy. Radiology 190 (1994) 517-524
8. Goldberg M.A., Gazelle G.S., Boland G.W., et al. Focal hepatic lesions: effect of three-dimensional wavelet compression on detection at CT. Radiology 202 (1997) 159-165
9. Ko J.P., Chang J., Bomsztyk E., et al. Effect of CT image compression on computer-assisted lung nodule volume measurement. Radiology 237 (2005) 83-88
10. Ko J.P., Rusinek H., Naidich D.P., et al. Wavelet compression of low-dose chest CT data: effect on lung nodule detection. Radiology 228 (2003) 70-75
11. Li F., Sone S., Takashima S., et al. Effects of JPEG and wavelet compression of spiral low-dose CT images on detection of small lung cancers. Acta Radiol 42 (2001) 156-160
12. Megibow A.J., Rusinek H., Lisi V., et al. Computed tomography diagnosis utilizing compressed image data: an ROC analysis using acute appendicitis as a model. J Digit Imaging 15 (2002) 84-90
13. Ohgiya Y., Gokan T., Nobusawa H., et al. Acute cerebral infarction: effect of JPEG compression on detection at CT. Radiology 227 (2003) 124-127
14. Zalis M.E., Hahn P.F., Arellano R.S., et al. CT colonography with teleradiology: effect of lossy wavelet compression on polyp detection-initial observations. Radiology 220 (2001) 387-392
15. Zheng L.M., Sone S., Itani Y., et al. Effect of CT digital image compression on detection of coronary artery calcification. Acta Radiol 41 (2000) 116-121
16. Kim TJ, Lee KW, Kim B, et al. Regional variance of visually lossless threshold in compressed chest CT Images: lung versus mediastinum and chest Wall. Eur J Radiol. In press.
17. Woo H.S., Kim K.J., Kim T.J., et al. JPEG 2000 compression of abdominal CT: difference in compression tolerance between thin- and thick-section images. Am J Roentgenol 189 (2007) 535-541
18. Slone R.M., Foos D.H., Whiting B.R., et al. Assessment of visually lossless irreversible image compression: comparison of three methods by using an image-comparison workstation. Radiology 215 (2000) 543-553
19. Ringl H., Schernthaner R.E., Bankier A.A., et al. JPEG2000 compression of thin-section CT images of the lung: effect of compression ratio on image quality. Radiology 240 (2006) 869-877
20. Slone R.M., Muka E., and Pilgram T.K. Irreversible JPEG compression of digital chest radiographs for primary interpretation: assessment of visually lossless threshold. Radiology 228 (2003) 425-429
21. Lee K.H., Kim Y.H., Kim B.H., et al. Irreversible JPEG 2000 compression of abdominal CT for primary interpretation: assessment of visually lossless threshold. Eur Radiol 17 (2007) 1529-1534
22. Kim B, Lee KH, Kim KJ, et al. Prediction of perceptible artifacts in JPEG2000 compressed chest CT images using mathematical and perceptual quality metrics. Am J Roentgenol. In press.
23. Krupinski E.A., and Kallergi M. Choosing a radiology workstation: technical and clinical considerations. Radiology 242 (2007) 671-682
24. Mantiuk R., Daly S., Myszkowski K., et al. Predicting visible differences in high dynamic range images-model and its calibration. Proc Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X, IS&T/SPIE's 17th Annual Symposium on Electronic Imaging (2005) 204-214
25. Mahesh M., Scatarige J.C., Cooper J., et al. Dose and pitch relationship for a particular multislice CT scanner. Am J Roentgenol 177 (2001) 1273-1275
26. Kim KJ, Kim B, Choi SW, et al. Definition of compression ratio: difference between two commercial JPEG2000 program libraries. Telemed J E Health. In press.
27. Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine (DICOM). Part 14: gray scale standard display function. NEMA standards publication no. PS 3.14-2006 (2006), National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Va
28. Wang Z., Sheikh H.R., and Bovik A.C. Objective video quality assessment. In: Furht B., and Marqure O. (Eds). The handbook of video databases: design and applications (2003), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 1041-1078
29. Quick R.F. A vector magnitude model of contrast detection. Kybernetik 16 (1974) 65-67
30. Eckert M.P., and Bradley A.P. Perceptual quality metrics applied to still image compression. Signal Processing 70 (1998) 177-200
31. Fleiss J.L., and Cuzick J. The reliability of dichotomous judgements: unequal numbers of judges per subject. Appl Psychol Measurement 3 (1979) 537-542
32. Persons K., Palisson P., Manduca A., et al. An analytical look at the effects of compression on medical images. J Digit Imaging 10 (1997) 60-66
33. Daly S. The visible differences predictor: an algorithm for the assessment of image fidelity. In: Watson A.B. (Ed). Digital images and human vision (1993), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 179-206
34. Lubin J. The use of psychophysical data and models in the analysis of display system performance. In: Watson A.B. (Ed). Digital images and human vision (1993), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 163-178
35. Siddiqui K.M., Siegel E.L., Reiner B.I., et al. Correlation of radiologists' image quality perception with quantitative assessment parameters: just-noticeable difference vs. peak signal-to-noise ratios. Proc SPIE 5748 (2005) 58-64
36. Krupinski E.A., Johnson J., Roehrig H., et al. Using a human visual system model to optimize soft-copy mammography display. Acad Radiol 10 (2003) 1030-1035
37. Li B., Meyer G.W., and Klassen R.V. A comparison of two image quality models. Proc SPIE 3299 (1998) 98-109
38. Lubin J., Brill M.H., and Crane R.L. Vision model-based assessment of distortion magnitudes in digital video. http://www.mpeg.org/MPEG/JND/ Accessed July 4, 2006
39. Daly S. A visual model for optimizing the design of image processing algorithms. IEEE Int Conf Image Proc (1994) 16-20
40. Siddiqui K.M., Johnson J.P., Reiner B.I., et al. Discrete cosine transform JPEG compression vs. 2D JPEG2000 compression: JNDmetrix visual discrimination model image quality analysis. Proc SPIE 5748 (2005) 202-207
41. Mantiuk R. HDR visual difference predictor. http://sourceforge.net/projects/hdrvdp Accessed July 4, 2006
42. Eskicioglu A.M., and Fisher P.S. Image quality measures and their performance. IEEE Trans Comm 43 (1995) 2959-2965
43. Final report from the video quality experts group on the validation of objective models of video quality assessment, phase II. http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov/vqeg/projects/frtv_phaseII/downloads/VQEGII_F inal_Report.pdf Accessed July 4, 2006
44. Wang Z., Bovik A.C., Sheikh H.R., et al. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans Image Proc 13 (2004) 600-612
45. Lee K.H., Kim Y.H., Hahn S., et al. Computed tomography diagnosis of acute appendicitis: advantages of reviewing thin-section datasets using sliding slab average intensity projection technique. Invest Radiol 41 (2006) 579-585
46. Prokop M. Multislice CT: technical principles and future trends. Eur Radiol 13 Suppl 5 (2003) M3-M13