|
|
||||||||
Thoracic Imaging |
1 From the Department of Radiology, University Hospital Vienna, AKH Wien, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, A-1090, Vienna, Austria (H.R., R.E.S., A.A.B., M.W., C.J.H., C.S.); and Department of Radiology, Utrecht Medical Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands (M.P.). Received March 29, 2005; revision requested May 25; revision received September 2; accepted September 12; final version accepted November 23. Address correspondence to H.R. (e-mail: helmut.ringl{at}meduniwien.ac.at).
Purpose: To assess retrospectively the effect of the Joint Photographic Experts Group 2000 (JPEG2000) compression ratio on the quality of thin-section computed tomographic (CT) images.
Materials and Methods: In this institutional review boardapproved investigation (protocol 238/2004), thin-section CT images were subjected to irreversible JPEG2000 compression by using five compression ratios (3:1, 5:1, 7:1, 9:1, and 11:1). Three radiologists independently evaluated 60 thin-section CT images, of various diseases, that were obtained with single-detector (weighted dose index, 14.4 mGy) and multidetector (weighted dose index, 9.8 mGy) CT. Toggling between the original and compressed images, readers had to identify the original image by using a forced-choice two-alternative model and to subjectively rank the quality of what they believed to be the compressed image. To assess the reader's ability to distinguish the compressed from the original image, a binomial test was used. Bonferroni correction was applied for all multiple tests.
Results: Images compressed with a ratio of 3:1 were not distinguishable from original images (P > .2 for all readers). With use of the 5:1 ratio, minor differences in appearance between the compressed and original images were seen by one of the three readers. With use of higher compression ratios (
7:1), all readers (P < .001) recognized the original image. The quality of more than 90% of the images compressed with a 7:1 or higher ratio was substantially degraded. Single-detector and multidetector CT results were not significantly different.
Conclusion: The highest ratio that yielded visually lossless compression of thin-section CT images was 3:1. With the 5:1 ratio, there was minor image quality loss, while use of higher compression ratios (
7:1) caused substantial degradation of image quality and potential loss of diagnostic information.
© RSNA, 2006
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. J. Kim, B. Kim, K. H. Lee, T. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-S. Kang, and Y. H. Kim Regional Difference in Compression Artifacts in Low-Dose Chest CT Images: Effects of Mathematical and Perceptual Factors Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W30 - W37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Bajpai, K. H. Lee, B. Kim, K. J. Kim, T. J. Kim, Y. H. Kim, and H. S. Kang Differences in Compression Artifacts on Thin- and Thick-Section Lung CT Images Am. J. Roentgenol., August 1, 2008; 191(2): W38 - W43. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, H.-r. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Artifacts in Slab Average-Intensity-Projection Images Reformatted from JPEG 2000 Compressed Thin-Section Abdominal CT Data Sets Am. J. Roentgenol., June 1, 2008; 190(6): W342 - W350. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Kim, K. H. Lee, K. J. Kim, R. Mantiuk, S. Hahn, T. J. Kim, and Y. H. Kim Prediction of Perceptible Artifacts in JPEG 2000 Compressed Chest CT Images Using Mathematical and Perceptual Quality Metrics Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2008; 190(2): 328 - 334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Ringl, R. E. Schernthaner, C. Kulinna-Cosentini, M. Weber, C. Schaefer-Prokop, C. J. Herold, and W. Schima Lossy Three-dimensional JPEG2000 Compression of Abdominal CT Images: Assessment of the Visually Lossless Threshold and Effect of Compression Ratio on Image Quality Radiology, November 1, 2007; 245(2): 467 - 474. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Fidler, B. Likar, and H. Rupert Ringl What Is Wrong with Compression Ratio in Lossy Image Compression? Radiology, October 1, 2007; 245(1): 299 - 300. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. S. Woo, K. J. Kim, T. J. Kim, S. Hahn, B. Kim, Y. H. Kim, and K. H. Lee JPEG 2000 Compression of Abdominal CT: Difference in Tolerance Between Thin- and Thick-Section Images Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2007; 189(3): 535 - 541. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| RADIOLOGY | RADIOGRAPHICS | RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE |