Distinguishing from other traditional imaging, synchrotron radiation microcomputed tomography (SR-μCT) imaging allows for the visualization of three-dimensional objects of interest in a nondestructive and/or in situ way with better spatial resolution, deep penetration, relatively fast speed, and/or high contrast. SR-μCT has been illustrated promising for visualizing and characterizing tissue scaffolds for repairing or replacing damaged tissue or organs in tissue engineering (TE), which is of particular advance for longitudinal monitoring and tracking the success of scaffolds once implanted in animal models and/or human patients. This article presents a comprehensive review on recent studies of characterization of scaffolds based on SR-μCT and takes scaffold architectural properties, mechanical properties, degradation, swelling and wettability, and biological properties as five separate sections to introduce SR-μCT wide applications. We also discuss and highlight the unique opportunities of SR-μCT in various TE applications; conclude this article with the suggested future research directions, including the prospective applications of SR-μCT, along with its challenges and methods for improvement in the field of TE.
Impact statement
Synchrotron radiation microcomputed tomography (SR-μCT) imaging allows for visualizing and characterizing three-dimensional objects in a nondestructive and/or in situ way with outstanding spatial resolution, deep penetration, relatively fast speed, and/or high contrast for wide ranges of tissue engineering (TE) samples. This article presents a comprehensive review on the recent studies and development based on SR-μCT to visualize and characterize scaffolds' different properties characterization in TE. This article also provides with the fundamentals and practice of SR-μCT to examine and evaluate the tissue scaffolds once implanted in animal models or human patients, along with the challenges and future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ZhangS., VijayavenkataramanS., LuW.F., et al.A review on the use of computational methods to characterize, design, and optimize tissue engineering scaffolds, with a potential in 3D printing fabrication. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater, 107, 1329, 2019.
2.
ChenD.X.Extrusion Bioprinting of Scaffolds for Tissue Engineering Applications. Springer Cham, The Capital Region of. Denmark: Springer, 2019.
3.
WangY., FanS., LiY., et al.Silk fibroin/sodium alginate composite porous materials with controllable degradation. Int J Biol Macromol, 150, 1314, 2020.
4.
O'brienF.J.Biomaterials & scaffolds for tissue engineering. Mater Today, 14, 88, 2011.
5.
CengizI.F., OliveiraJ.M., and ReisR.L.Micro-CT—a digital 3D microstructural voyage into scaffolds: a systematic review of the reported methods and results. Biomater Res, 22, 1, 2018.
6.
TeodoriL., CrupiA., CostaA., et al.Three-dimensional imaging technologies: a priority for the advancement of tissue engineering and a challenge for the imaging community. J Biophotonics, 10, 24, 2017.
7.
DengS., ZhuY., ZhangH., et al.A method for material decomposition and quantification with grating based phase CT. PLoS One, 16, e0245449, 2021.
8.
PfeifferF., WeitkampT., BunkO., et al.Phase retrieval and differential phase-contrast imaging with low-brilliance X-ray sources. Nat Phys, 2, 258, 2006.
9.
StachewiczU., SzewczykP.K., KrukA., et al.Pore shape and size dependence on cell growth into electrospun fiber scaffolds for tissue engineering: 2D and 3D analyses using SEM and FIB-SEM tomography. Mater Sci Eng C Mater Biol Appl, 95, 397, 2019.
10.
RouhollahiA., IlegbusiO., and ForooshH.Segmentation and pore structure estimation in SEM images of tissue engineering scaffolds using Genetic Algorithm. Ann Biomed Eng, 49, 1033, 2021.
11.
NingL., ZhuN., SmithA., et al.Noninvasive three-dimensional in situ and in vivo characterization of bioprinted hydrogel scaffolds using the X-ray Propagation-Based Imaging Technique. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 13, 25611, 2021.
12.
MehrN.G., LiX., ChenG., et al.Pore size and LbL chitosan coating influence mesenchymal stem cell in vitro fibrosis and biomineralization in 3D porous poly (epsilon-caprolactone) scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res A, 103, 2449, 2015.
13.
ChenC.-W., BetzM.W., FisherJ.P., et al.Macroporous hydrogel scaffolds and their characterization by optical coherence tomography. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 17, 101, 2011.
14.
WangL., XuM.-E., LuoL., et al.Iterative feedback bio-printing-derived cell-laden hydrogel scaffolds with optimal geometrical fidelity and cellular controllability. Sci Rep, 8, 1, 2018.
15.
CrichS.G., Di GregorioE., BitontoV., et al.Monitoring tissue implants by field-cycling 1 H-MRI via the detection of changes in the 14 N-quadrupolar-peak from Imidazole moieties incorporated in a “smart “scaffold material. J Mater Chem B, 9, 2021, 4863.
16.
LiH., YinY., XiangY., et al.A novel 3D printing PCL/GelMA scaffold containing USPIO for MRI-guided bile duct repair. Biomed Mater, 15, 045004, 2020.
17.
TalukdarY., AvtiP., SunJ., et al.Multimodal ultrasound-photoacoustic imaging of tissue engineering scaffolds and blood oxygen saturation in and around the scaffolds. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 20, 440, 2014.
18.
YuJ., TakanariK., HongY., et al.Non-invasive characterization of polyurethane-based tissue constructs in a rat abdominal repair model using high frequency ultrasound elasticity imaging. Biomaterials, 34, 2701, 2013.
19.
GrandfieldK., PalmquistA., EricsonF., et al.Bone Response to Free-Form Fabricated Hydroxyapatite and Zirconia Scaffolds: a Transmission Electron Microscopy Study in the Human Maxilla. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res, 14, 461, 2012.
20.
SaiH., TanK.W., HurK., et al.Hierarchical porous polymer scaffolds from block copolymers. Science, 341, 530, 2013.
21.
BagherzadehR., LatifiM., NajarS.S., et al.Three-dimensional pore structure analysis of Nano/Microfibrous scaffolds using confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Biomed Mater Res A, 101, 765, 2013.
22.
PhippsM.C., ClemW.C., GrundaJ.M., et al.Increasing the pore sizes of bone-mimetic electrospun scaffolds comprised of polycaprolactone, collagen I and hydroxyapatite to enhance cell infiltration. Biomaterials, 33, 524, 2012.
23.
PangY., TsigkouO., SpencerJ.A., et al.Analyzing structure and function of vascularization in engineered bone tissue by video-rate intravital microscopy and 3D image processing. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 21, 1025, 2015.
24.
DengC.X., HongX., and StegemannJ.P.Ultrasound imaging techniques for spatiotemporal characterization of composition, microstructure, and mechanical properties in tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 22, 311, 2016.
25.
OlubamijiA.D., IzadifarZ., and ChenD.X.Synchrotron imaging techniques for bone and cartilage tissue engineering: potential, current trends, and future directions. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 20, 503, 2014.
26.
MastrogiacomoM., CampiG., CanceddaR., et al.Synchrotron radiation techniques boost the research in bone tissue engineering. Acta Biomater, 89, 33, 2019.
27.
AppelA., AnastasioM.A., and BreyE.M.Potential for imaging engineered tissues with X-ray phase contrast. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 17, 321, 2011.
28.
NeldamC.A., and PinholtE.M.Synchrotron μCT imaging of bone, titanium implants and bone substitutes—A systematic review of the literature. J Craniomaxillofac Surg, 42, 801, 2014.
29.
GiulianiA., MazzoniS., MeleL., et al.Synchrotron phase tomography: an emerging imaging method for microvessel detection in engineered bone of craniofacial districts. Front Physiol, 8, 769, 2017.
30.
LiH., HelpardL., EkerootJ., et al.Three-dimensional tonotopic mapping of the human cochlea based on synchrotron radiation phase-contrast imaging. Sci Rep, 11, 1, 2021.
31.
IzadifarM., BabynP., ChapmanD., et al.Potential of propagation-based synchrotron X-ray phase-contrast computed tomography for cardiac tissue engineering. J Synchrotron Radiat, 24, 842, 2017.
32.
JiangL., LiC., LiM., et al.Simultaneous 3D visualization of the microvascular and neural network in mouse spinal cord using synchrotron radiation micro-computed tomography. Neurosci Bull, 37, 1469, 2021.
33.
LeferinkA.M., van BlitterswijkC.A., and MoroniL.J.T.E.P.B.R.Methods of monitoring cell fate and tissue growth in three-dimensional scaffold-based strategies for in vitro tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 22, 265, 2016.
34.
OliveiraJ.M., CarvalhoL., Silva-CorreiaJ., et al.Hydrogel-based scaffolds to support intrathecal stem cell transplantation as a gateway to the spinal cord: clinical needs, biomaterials, and imaging technologies. NPJ Regen Med, 3, 1, 2018.
35.
MiaoH., PannaA., GomellaA.A., et al.A universal moiré effect and application in X-ray phase-contrast imaging. Nat Phys, 12, 830, 2016.
36.
ChapmanD., ThomlinsonW., JohnstonR., et al.Diffraction enhanced x-ray imaging. Phys Med Biol, 42, 2015, 1997.
37.
WernickM.N., WirjadiO., ChapmanD., et al.Multiple-image radiography. Phys Med Biol, 48, 3875, 2003.
38.
SuzukiY., YagiN., and UesugiK.X-ray refraction-enhanced imaging and a method for phase retrieval for a simple object. J Synchrotron Radiat, 9, 160, 2002.
39.
LiM., and LiuW.A novel parameterized digital-mask generation method for projection stereolithography in tissue engineering. Rapid Prototyp J, 42, 935, 2018.
40.
BobbertF., and ZadpoorA.Effects of bone substitute architecture and surface properties on cell response, angiogenesis, and structure of new bone. J Mater Chem B, 5, 6175, 2017.
41.
MontazerianH., DavoodiE., Asadi-EydivandM., et al.Porous scaffold internal architecture design based on minimal surfaces: a compromise between permeability and elastic properties. Mater Des, 126, 98, 2017.
42.
EisenbarthE.Biomaterials for tissue engineering. Adv Eng Mater, 9, 1051, 2007.
43.
LiuY., YangS., CaoL., et al.Facilitated vascularization and enhanced bone regeneration by manipulation hierarchical pore structure of scaffolds. Mater Sci Eng C, 110, 110622, 2020.
44.
BertoldiS., FarèS., and TanziM.C.Assessment of scaffold porosity: the new route of micro-CT. J Appl Biomater Biomech, 9, 165, 2011.
45.
NingL., ZhuN., MohabatpourF., et al.Bioprinting Schwann cell-laden scaffolds from low-viscosity hydrogel compositions. J Mater Chem B, 7, 4538, 2019.
46.
HoS.T., and HutmacherD.W.A comparison of micro CT with other techniques used in the characterization of scaffolds. Biomaterials, 27, 1362, 2006.
47.
XiaoX., WangW., LiuD., et al.The promotion of angiogenesis induced by three-dimensional porous beta-tricalcium phosphate scaffold with different interconnection sizes via activation of PI3K/Akt pathways. Sci Rep, 5, 1, 2015.
48.
FiumeE., SchiaviA., OrlygssonG., et al.Comprehensive assessment of bioactive glass and glass-ceramic scaffold permeability: experimental measurements by pressure wave drop, modelling and computed tomography-based analysis. Acta Biomater, 119, 405, 2021.
49.
BhartiyaA., MadiK., DisneyC., et al.Phase-contrast 3D tomography of HeLa cells grown in PLLA polymer electrospun scaffolds using synchrotron X-rays. J Synchrotron Radiat, 27, 158, 2020.
50.
TabaS.T., GureyevT.E., AlakhrasM., et al.X-ray phase-contrast technology in breast imaging: principles, options, and clinical application. Am J Roentgenol, 211, 133, 2018.
51.
SeoS.-J., and KimY.-G.In-situ analysis of the hydration ability of bone graft material using a synchrotron radiation X-ray micro-CT. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater, 18, 2280800020963476, 2020.
52.
BuzmakovA.V., DunaevA.G., KrivonosovY.S., et al.Wide-ranging multitool study of structure and porosity of PLGA scaffolds for tissue engineering. Polymers, 13, 1021, 2021.
53.
KhrapovD., SurmenevaM., KoptiougA., et al.X-ray computed tomography of multiple-layered scaffolds with controlled gradient cell lattice structures fabricated via additive manufacturing. J Phys, 1145, 012044, 2019.
54.
BormannT., SchulzG., DeyhleH., et al.Combining micro computed tomography and three-dimensional registration to evaluate local strains in shape memory scaffolds. Acta Biomater, 10, 1024, 2014.
55.
LiL.-M., HanM., JiangX.-C., et al.Peptide-tethered hydrogel scaffold promotes recovery from spinal cord transection via synergism with mesenchymal stem cells. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces, 9, 3330, 2017.
56.
BawolinN., and ChenX.Remote determination of time-dependent stiffness of surface-degrading-polymer scaffolds via synchrotron-based imaging. J Biomech Eng, 139, 041004, 2017.
57.
Charles-HarrisM., del ValleS., HentgesE., et al.Mechanical and structural characterisation of completely degradable polylactic acid/calcium phosphate glass scaffolds. Biomaterials, 28, 4429, 2007.
58.
BrunF., ManciniL., KasaeP., et al.Pore3D: a software library for quantitative analysis of porous media. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res Sect A, 615, 326, 2010.
59.
ThiemA., LumV., GruppR., et al.Synchrotron μCT investigation of the collapsing pore-network of gelatin scaffolds under compression. Adv Mater Res, 89, 551, 2010.
60.
DhillonA., SchneiderP., KuhnG., et al.Analysis of sintered polymer scaffolds using concomitant synchrotron computed tomography and in situ mechanical testing. J Mater Sci, 22, 2599, 2011.
61.
IzadifarM., BabynP., KellyM.E., et al.Bioprinting pattern-dependent electrical/mechanical behavior of cardiac alginate implants: characterization and ex vivo phase-contrast microtomography assessment. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 23, 548, 2017.
62.
FernándezM.P., KaoA.P., BonithonR., et al.Time-resolved in situ synchrotron-microCT: 4D deformation of bone and bone analogues using digital volume correlation. Acta Biomater, 131, 424, 2021.
63.
DaiC., GuoH., LuJ., et al.Osteogenic evaluation of calcium/magnesium-doped mesoporous silica scaffold with incorporation of rhBMP-2 by synchrotron radiation-based μCT. Biomaterials, 32, 8506, 2011.
64.
LamC.X., HutmacherD.W., SchantzJ.T., et al.Evaluation of polycaprolactone scaffold degradation for 6 months in vitro and in vivo. J Biomed Mater Res A, 90, 906, 2009.
65.
NiuH., MaY., WuG., et al.Multicellularity-interweaved bone regeneration of BMP-2-loaded scaffold with orchestrated kinetics of resorption and osteogenesis. Biomaterials, 216, 119216, 2019.
66.
TakashimaK., HoshinoM., UesugiK., et al.X-ray phase-contrast computed tomography visualizes the microstructure and degradation profile of implanted biodegradable scaffolds after spinal cord injury. J Synchrotron Radiat, 22, 136, 2015.
67.
OlubamijiA.D., ZhuN., ChangT., et al.Traditional invasive and synchrotron-based noninvasive assessments of three-dimensional-printed hybrid cartilage constructs in situ. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 23, 156, 2017.
68.
GattoM.L., FurlaniM., GiulianiA., et al.Biomechanical performances of PCL/HA micro-and macro-porous lattice scaffolds fabricated via laser powder bed fusion for bone tissue engineering. Mater Sci Eng C, 128, 112300, 2021.
69.
LinD., ChaiY., MaY., et al.Rapid initiation of guided bone regeneration driven by spatiotemporal delivery of IL-8 and BMP-2 from hierarchical MBG-based scaffold. Biomaterials, 196, 122, 2019.
70.
BrunF., TurcoG., PaolettiS., et al.A synchrotron radiation microtomography study of wettability and swelling of nanocomposite Alginate/Hydroxyapatite scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Presented at the World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, June 7–12, 2015, Toronto, Canada, 2015, pp. 288–291.
71.
EhrenfriedL.M., FarrarD., and CameronR.E.The degradation properties of co-continuous calcium phosphate polyester composites: insights with synchrotron micro-computer tomography. J Mater Sci Mater Med, 7, S663, 2010.
72.
WemmerJ., MalafronteL., FoschiniS., et al.Fabrication of a novel protein sponge with dual-scale porosity and mixed wettability using a clean and versatile microwave-based process. Materials, 14, 2298, 2021.
73.
MooreM.J., FriedmanJ.A., LewellynE.B., et al.Multiple-channel scaffolds to promote spinal cord axon regeneration. Biomaterials, 27, 419, 2006.
74.
FinamoreT.A., CurtisT.E., TedescoJ.V., et al.Nondestructive, longitudinal measurement of collagen scaffold degradation using computed tomography and gold nanoparticles. Nanoscale, 11, 4345, 2019.
75.
MomoseA., KawamotoS., KoyamaI., et al.Demonstration of X-ray Talbot interferometry. Jpn J Appl Phys, 42, L866, 2003.
76.
HoshinoM., UesugiK., and YagiN.Phase-contrast X-ray microtomography of mouse fetus. Biol Open, 1, 269, 2012.
77.
GonzagaV.d.A., PoliA.L., GabrielJ.S., et al.Chitosan-laponite nanocomposite scaffolds for wound dressing application. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater, 108, 1388, 2020.
78.
SarikaP., CinthyaK., JayakrishnanA., et al.Modified gum arabic cross-linked gelatin scaffold for biomedical applications. Mater Sci Eng C, 43, 272, 2014.
79.
MoroniL., De WijnJ., and Van BlitterswijkC.J.Three-dimensional fiber-deposited PEOT/PBT copolymer scaffolds for tissue engineering: Influence of porosity, molecular network mesh size, and swelling in aqueous media on dynamic mechanical properties. J Biomed Mater Res A, 75, 957, 2005.
80.
DoshiB., SillanpääM., and KalliolaS.A review of bio-based materials for oil spill treatment. Water Res, 135, 262, 2018.
81.
WilliamsD.F. Definitions in Biomaterials: Proceedings of a Consensus Conference of the European Society for Biomaterials. Chester, England: Elsevier Science Limited, March 3–5, 1987.
82.
StockertJ.C., HorobinR.W., ColomboL.L., et al.Tetrazolium salts and formazan products in Cell Biology: viability assessment, fluorescence imaging, and labeling perspectives. Acta Histochem, 120, 159, 2018.
83.
ZuoW., YuL., ZhangH., et al.Mineralized collagen scaffold bone graft accelerate the osteogenic process of HASCs in proper concentration. Regen Ther, 18, 161, 2021.
84.
OkkelmanI.A., PuschhofJ., PapkovskyD.B., et al.Visualization of Stem Cell Niche by Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging Microscopy. In: Ordóñez-Morán, P., eds. Intestinal Stem Cells. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2171. New York, NY: Humana,, 2020, pp. 65–97.
85.
QiY., TaiZ., SunD., et al.Fabrication and characterization of poly (vinyl alcohol)/graphene oxide nanofibrous biocomposite scaffolds. J Appl Polymer Sci, 127, 1885, 2013.
86.
DawsonC.A., MuellerS.N., LindemanG.J., et al.Intravital microscopy of dynamic single-cell behavior in mouse mammary tissue. Nat Protoc, 16, 1907, 2021.
87.
KumarC.S.X-ray and Neutron Techniques for Nanomaterials Characterization. Berlin, Germany: Springer, 2016.
88.
IzadifarZ., HonaramoozA., WiebeS., et al.Low-dose phase-based X-ray imaging techniques for in situ soft tissue engineering assessments. Biomaterials, 82, 151, 2016.
89.
WeberL., LangerM., TavellaS., et al.Quantitative evaluation of regularized phase retrieval algorithms on bone scaffolds seeded with bone cells. Phys Med Biol, 61, N215, 2016.
90.
ForienJ.-B., FleckC., CloetensP., et al.Compressive residual strains in mineral nanoparticles as a possible origin of enhanced crack resistance in human tooth dentin. Nano Lett, 15, 3729, 2015.
91.
MandalB.B., and KunduS.C.Cell proliferation and migration in silk fibroin 3D scaffolds. Biomaterials, 30, 2956, 2009.
92.
LiouH., LinH., ChenW., et al.Tomography observations of osteoblast seeding on 3-D collagen scaffold by synchrotron radiation hard X-ray. J Biomim Biomater Tissue Eng, 3, 93, 2009.
93.
AlbertiniG., GiulianiA., KomlevV., et al.Organization of extracellular matrix fibers within polyglycolic acid–polylactic acid scaffolds analyzed using X-ray synchrotron-radiation phase-contrast micro computed tomography. Tissue Eng Part C Methods, 15, 403, 2009.
94.
ThurnerP., MüllerR., RaeberG., et al.3D morphology of cell cultures: a quantitative approach using micrometer synchrotron light tomography. Microsc Res Techn, 66, 289, 2005.
95.
CreffJ., CoursonR., MangeatT., et al.Fabrication of 3D scaffolds reproducing intestinal epithelium topography by high-resolution 3D stereolithography. Biomaterials, 221, 119404, 2019.
96.
BaptistaR., PereiraM., MauricioA., et al.Experimental and numerical characterization of 3D-printed scaffolds under monotonic compression with the aid of micro-CT volume reconstruction. Bio-Design Manuf, 4, 222, 2021.
97.
KowalczykP., TrzaskowskaP., ŁojszczykI., et al.Production of 3D printed polylactide scaffolds with surface grafted hydrogel coatings. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces, 179, 136, 2019.
98.
LeferinkA.M., HendriksonW., RouwkemaJ., et al.Increased cell seeding efficiency in bioplotted three-dimensional PEOT/PBT scaffolds. J Tissue Eng Regen Med, 10, 679, 2016.
99.
LeferinkA.M., van BlitterswijkC.A., and MoroniL.Methods of monitoring cell fate and tissue growth in three-dimensional scaffold-based strategies for in vitro tissue engineering. Tissue Eng Part B Rev, 22, 265, 2016.
100.
GramaccioniC., YangY., ProcopioA., et al.Nanoscale quantification of intracellular element concentration by X-ray fluorescence microscopy combined with X-ray phase contrast nanotomography. Appl Phys Lett, 112, 053701, 2018.
101.
PeltD.M., and ParkinsonD.Y.Ring artifact reduction in synchrotron x-ray tomography through helical acquisition. Meas Sci Technol, 29, 034002, 2018.
102.
HesseB. Characterization of tissue properties on the sub-micron scale in human bone by means of Synchrotron RadiationCT. 2014.
103.
DullinC., AlbersJ., TrombaG., et al.MÖNCH detector enables fast and low-dose free-propagation phase-contrast computed tomography of in situ mouse lungs. J Synchrotron Radiat, 25, 565, 2018.
104.
SarnoA., MettivierG., GolosioB., et al.Imaging performance of phase-contrast breast computed tomography with synchrotron radiation and a CdTe photon-counting detector. Phys Med, 32, 681, 2016.
105.
IzadifarZ. Development of Hybrid-construct Bioprinting and Synchrotron-based Non-invasive Assessment Techniques for Cartilage Tissue Engineering [PhD. thesis]. Division of Biomedical Engineering, Saskatoon, Canada, University of Saskatchewan, 2015.
106.
MatsumotoT., ShimizuR., and UesugiK.In vivo monitoring of bone microstructure by propagation-based phase-contrast computed tomography using monochromatic synchrotron light. Lab Investig, 100, 72, 2020.
107.
ZhangX., JacobsenC., LindaasS., et al.Exposure strategies for polymethyl methacrylate from in situ X-ray absorption near edge structure spectroscopy. J Vac Sci Technol B Microelectron Nanometer Struct Process Measure Phenom, 13, 1477, 1995.
108.
SaloméM., CotteM., BakerR., et al.The ID21 scanning X-ray microscope at ESRF. J Phys, 425, 182004, 2013.
109.
SöderbergM., and GunnarssonM.Automatic exposure control in computed tomography—An evaluation of systems from different manufacturers. Acta Radiol, 51, 625, 2010.
110.
BurkhardtA., PakendorfT., ReimeB., et al.Status of the crystallography beamlines at PETRA III. Eur Phys J Plus, 131, 1, 2016.
111.
DengX., ZhaoX., LiM., et al.Limited-angle CT reconstruction with generalized shrinkage operators as regularizers. Inverse Probl Imaging, 2021. DOI: 10.3934/ipi.2021019
112.
XuM., HuD., LuoF., et al.Limited angle X ray CT reconstruction using image gradient ℓ0 norm with dictionary learning. IEEE Trans Radiat Plasma Med Sci, 5, 78, 2020.
113.
ZhaoJ., ChenZ., ZhangL., et al. Unsupervised learnable sinogram inpainting network (SIN) for limited angle CT reconstruction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.03911. 2018.
114.
GuJ., and YeJ.C. Multi-scale wavelet domain residual learning for limited-angle CT reconstruction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.01382. 2017.
115.
VonderM., VliegenthartR., KaateeM.A., et al.High-pitch versus sequential mode for coronary calcium in individuals with a high heart rate: potential for dose reduction. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr, 12, 298, 2018.
116.
ZhuangY., HuangW., ShiY., et al.Prospective-triggered high-pitch spiral versus sequential dual-source CT coronary angiography: comparison of image quality and radiation dose. Int J Radiat Res, 16, 225, 2018.
117.
BastarrikaG., CalvoM., EzpondaA., et al.Systolic high-pitch coronary CT angiography for evaluation of the coronary arteries in heart transplant recipients. Am J Roentgenol, 215, 828, 2020.
118.
LapegueF., Faruch-BilfeldM., DemondionX., et al.Ultrasonography of the brachial plexus, normal appearance and practical applications. Diagn Interv Imaging, 95, 259, 2014.
119.
LimH.K., HaH.I., HwangH.J., et al.High-pitch, 120 kVp/30 mAs, low-dose dual-source chest CT with iterative reconstruction: prospective evaluation of radiation dose reduction and image quality compared with those of standard-pitch low-dose chest CT in healthy adult volunteers. PLos One, 14, e0211097, 2019.
120.
CardarelliP., BacciA., CalandrinoR., et al.BriXS, a new X-ray inverse Compton source for medical applications. Phys Med, 77, 127, 2020.
121.
GradlP.R., GreeneS.E., ProtzC., et al. Additive manufacturing of liquid rocket engine combustion devices: a summary of process developments and hot-fire testing results. 54th AIAA/SAE/ASEE Jt. Propuls. Conf. (2018) 1–34. DOI: 10.2514/6.2018-4625.
