Published October 21, 2014 | Version v1
Journal article

Experimental comparison of grating- and propagation-based hard X-ray phase tomography of soft tissue

  • 1. Biomaterials Science Center, University of Basel, Basel (Switzerland)
  • 2. European Synchrotron Radiation Facility, Grenoble (France)
  • 3. Physik-Department und Institut für Medizintechnik, Technische Universität München, Garching (Germany)
  • 4. Institute for Biomedical Engineering, ETH Zürich, Zürich (Switzerland)
  • 5. Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA-LYON, Université de Lyon 1, Villeurbane (France)
  • 6. Laboratory for Micro- and Nanotechnology, Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen (Switzerland)
  • 7. Institute of Microstructure Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Eggenstein-Leopoldshafen (Germany)
  • 8. Synchrotron Soleil, Gif-sur-Yvette (France)

Description

When imaging soft tissues with hard X-rays, phase contrast is often preferred over conventional attenuation contrast due its superior sensitivity. However, it is unclear which of the numerous phase tomography methods yields the optimized results at given experimental conditions. Therefore, we quantitatively compared the three phase tomography methods implemented at the beamline ID19 of the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility: X-ray grating interferometry (XGI), and propagation-based phase tomography, i.e., single-distance phase retrieval (SDPR) and holotomography (HT), using cancerous tissue from a mouse model and an entire heart of a rat. We show that for both specimens, the spatial resolution derived from the characteristic morphological features is about a factor of two better for HT and SDPR compared to XGI, whereas the XGI data generally exhibit much better contrast-to-noise ratios for the anatomical features. Moreover, XGI excels in fidelity of the density measurements, and is also more robust against low-frequency artifacts than HT, but it might suffer from phase-wrapping artifacts. Thus, we can regard the three phase tomography methods discussed as complementary. The application will decide which spatial and density resolutions are desired, for the imaging task and dose requirements, and, in addition, the applicant must choose between the complexity of the experimental setup and the one of data processing.

Additional details

Identifiers

Publishing Information

Journal Title
Journal of Applied Physics
Journal Volume
116
Journal Issue
15
Journal Page Range
p. 154903-154903.12
ISSN
0021-8979
CODEN
JAPIAU

Optional Information

Notes
(c) 2014 AIP Publishing LLC