Exploration of the pulse pileup effects in a clinical CdTe‐based photon‐counting computed tomography

Abstract Background High tube current generates a high flux of x‐rays to photon counting detectors (PCDs) that can potentially result in the piling up of pulses formed by concurrent photons, which can cause count loss and energy resolution degradation. Purpose To evaluate the performance of clinical photon‐counting CT (PCCT) systems in high flux, potentially influenced by pulse pileup effects, in terms of task‐generic image quality metrics. Methods A clinical phantom was scanned on a commercial PCCT scanner (NAEOTOM Alpha, Siemens) at 120 kV under fourteen different tube current levels (40–1000 mA) with a rotation time of 0.25 s and a pitch of 1. The dose levels corresponded to CTDI vol (32 cm phantom) of 0.79–19.8 mGy. CT sinograms were reconstructed using QIR‐off mode (noniterative reconstruction algorithm), Br44 kernel, and a voxel size of . imQuest, an open‐source MATLAB‐based software package was used to calculate noise power spectrum (NPS), task transfer function (TTF), contrast‐to‐noise ratio (CNR), and CT number according to AAPM Task Group 233 metrology. Results The 50% cut‐off frequency of TTF (f 50 ) remained mostly constant across all higher tube currents for all inserts, namely polyethylene, bone, air, and acrylic. Using the lowest two data points (40 and 80 mA), the expected relationship between noise magnitude and tube current was determined to be noise mA −0.47 . The measured noise magnitude were up to 11.1% higher than the expected value at the highest tube current. The average frequency of NPS ( f av ) decreased from 0.32 to 0.29 mm −1 as tube current increased from 40 to 1000 mA. No considerable effects were observed in CT number measurement of any insert; however, CT numbers for air and bone changed almost monotonically as tube current increased. Absolute CNR increased monotonically for all inserts; however, the difference between measured and expected CNRs were approximately −6% to 12% across all tube currents. Conclusions Increasing tube currents did not affect the spatial resolution, but slightly affected the CT number and noise measurements of the clinical PCCT system. However, the effects were only considerable at clinically irrelevant tube currents used on a small 20‐cm phantom. In general clinical practices, automatic exposure control techniques are used to decrease the variation of flux on the detector, which alleviates the chances of detector saturation due to high count rates. The observed effects could be due to pulse pileup, signal‐dependent filtration of the system, or nonlinearities in the reconstruction algorithm. In conclusion, either the deadtime of the detector used in the photon‐counting CT system is shorter such that count losses due to pulse pileup are negligible, or pulse pileup has inconsiderable effects on the image quality of clinical photon‐counting CT systems in routine clinical practice due to possible corrections applied on the system.