
doi: 10.2214/ajr.11.7061
pmid: 22915404
Despite the increasingly broad use of perfusion applications, we still have no generally accessible means for their verification: The common sense of perfusion maps and "bona fides" of perfusion software vendors remain the only grounds for acceptance. Thus, perfusion applications are one of a very few clinical tools considerably lacking practical objective hands-on validation.To solve this problem, we introduce digital perfusion phantoms (DPPs)--numerically simulated DICOM image sequences specifically designed to have known perfusion maps with simple visual patterns. Processing DPP perfusion sequences with any perfusion algorithm or software of choice and comparing the results with the expected DPP patterns provide a robust and straightforward way to control the quality of perfusion analysis, software, and protocols.The deviations from the expected DPP maps, observed in each perfusion software, provided clear visualization of processing differences and possible perfusion implementation errors.Perfusion implementation errors, often hidden behind real-data anatomy and noise, become very visible with DPPs. We strongly recommend using DPPs to verify the quality of perfusion applications.
Blood Volume, Phantoms, Imaging, Perfusion Imaging, Models, Theoretical, Artifacts, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Algorithms, Blood Flow Velocity, Software
Blood Volume, Phantoms, Imaging, Perfusion Imaging, Models, Theoretical, Artifacts, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Algorithms, Blood Flow Velocity, Software
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
