1991
DOI: 10.1364/josaa.8.001639
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of two three-dimensional x-ray cone-beam-reconstruction algorithms with circular source trajectories

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One approach aims to correct for the missing data via Radon space interpolation. [13][14][15] However, Radon-based correction methods tend to be less time effective than standard backprojection algorithms, and to perform poorly with axially truncated data. Yang et al, 16 more recently, proposed a shift-variant, filtered-backprojection method that includes estimated information outside of the Radon torus, potentially providing a more feasible implementation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One approach aims to correct for the missing data via Radon space interpolation. [13][14][15] However, Radon-based correction methods tend to be less time effective than standard backprojection algorithms, and to perform poorly with axially truncated data. Yang et al, 16 more recently, proposed a shift-variant, filtered-backprojection method that includes estimated information outside of the Radon torus, potentially providing a more feasible implementation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The cone beam aperture is therefore limited to 6°. This aperture is compatible with the use offiltered backprojection algorithms without introducing drastic artifacts [12). We use the Feldkamp algorithm [13] to process our data.…”
Section: Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As yet, there are no clinical cone-beam scanners, although a variety of cone-beam algorithms have been proposed in the mid-80s. Present cone-beam algorithms are mostly based on FBP [5][8] [21] (see also [17] [22] for comparisons and reviews). However, more recent research [14] has demonstrated that ART (with certain modifications) and SART can reconstruct general cone-beam data as well, at high accuracy and even for large cone-angles of up to 60˚.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%