Bad quality images!? SimVascular inefficient image loading?

Provides a system for patient-specific cardiovascular modeling and simulation.
POST REPLY
User avatar
Jack Tattersall
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 6:23 am

Bad quality images!? SimVascular inefficient image loading?

Post by Jack Tattersall » Wed Jan 08, 2020 8:03 am

Hello,

It has appeared to me (although I am not completely sure) that whenever I load MRI Dicom files into SimVascular, they seem much more pixelated compared to the software in the hospital / other software like RadiAnt. In SimVascular it always seems to be of lesser quality. Attached I have put 2 images; 1 containing a zoomed-in image in RadiAnt of 3x the same vessel, and the other is an image of the same vessel and same data in SimVascular, where you can clearly see that suddenly the same data is of much lower quality, which ultimalty is effecting the segmentation quite severly.
Does anyone know how this is possible, is this fixable?

Cheers and thanks in advance,
Jack Tattersall
Attachments
SimV_pixilated.PNG
sim vascular vessel
SimV_pixilated.PNG (22.46 KiB) Viewed 253 times
less_pixilated.PNG
same data same vessel in RadiAnt / other software
less_pixilated.PNG (455.45 KiB) Viewed 253 times

User avatar
David Parker
Posts: 1747
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:43 pm

Re: Bad quality images!? SimVascular inefficient image loading?

Post by David Parker » Thu Jan 09, 2020 11:55 am

Hi Jack,

SV displays image data at its original resolution. When you zoom in it will just scale the image, does not do any subsampling or smoothing. The RadiAnt image appears to be smoothed.

When you are segmented image data make sure that the slice window is large enough to contain the image data you want to segment, change this using the Size button in the SV 2D Segmentation tool panel.

What is the resolution of the images you attached in your original post?

Cheers,
Dave

User avatar
Jack Tattersall
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 6:23 am

Re: Bad quality images!? SimVascular inefficient image loading?

Post by Jack Tattersall » Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:11 am

Ah okay that could explain it, the resolution was 0.8 x 0.8 mm I think but obtained Saggital.

POST REPLY