PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of ASIR on CAD system of pulmonary nodules using clinical routine-dose CT and lower-dose CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients (body mass index, 22.17 ± 4.37 kg/m(2)) were scanned by multidetector-row CT with tube currents (clinical routine-dose CT, automatically adjusted mA; lower-dose CT, 10 mA) and X-ray voltage (120 kVp). Each 0.625-mm-thick image was reconstructed at 0%-, 50%-, and 100%-ASIR: 0%-ASIR is reconstructed using only the filtered back-projection algorithm (FBP), while 100%-ASIR is reconstructed using the maximum ASIR and 50%-ASIR implies a blending of 50% FBP and ASIR. CAD output was compared retrospectively with the results of the reference standard which was established using a consensus panel of three radiologists. Data were analyzed using Bonferroni/Dunn's method. Radiation dose was calculated by multiplying dose-length product by conversion coefficient of 0.021. RESULTS: The consensus panel found 265 non-calcified nodules ≤ 30 mm (ground-glass opacity [GGO], 103; part-solid, 34; and solid, 128). CAD sensitivity was significantly higher at 100%-ASIR [clinical routine-dose CT, 71% (overall), 49% (GGO); lower-dose CT, 52% (overall), 67% (solid)] than at 0%-ASIR [clinical routine-dose CT, 54% (overall), 25% (GGO); lower-dose CT, 36% (overall), 50% (solid)] (p<0.001). Mean number of false-positive findings per examination was significantly higher at 100%-ASIR (clinical routine-dose CT, 8.5; lower-dose CT, 6.2) than at 0%-ASIR (clinical routine-dose CT, 4.6; lower-dose CT, 3.5; p<0.001). Effective doses were 10.77 ± 3.41 mSv in clinical routine-dose CT and 2.67 ± 0.17 mSv in lower-dose CT. CONCLUSION: CAD sensitivity at 100%-ASIR on lower-dose CT is almost equal to that at 0%-ASIR on clinical routine-dose CT. ASIR can increase CAD sensitivity despite increased false-positive findings.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of ASIR on CAD system of pulmonary nodules using clinical routine-dose CT and lower-dose CT. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five patients (body mass index, 22.17 ± 4.37 kg/m(2)) were scanned by multidetector-row CT with tube currents (clinical routine-dose CT, automatically adjusted mA; lower-dose CT, 10 mA) and X-ray voltage (120 kVp). Each 0.625-mm-thick image was reconstructed at 0%-, 50%-, and 100%-ASIR: 0%-ASIR is reconstructed using only the filtered back-projection algorithm (FBP), while 100%-ASIR is reconstructed using the maximum ASIR and 50%-ASIR implies a blending of 50% FBP and ASIR. CAD output was compared retrospectively with the results of the reference standard which was established using a consensus panel of three radiologists. Data were analyzed using Bonferroni/Dunn's method. Radiation dose was calculated by multiplying dose-length product by conversion coefficient of 0.021. RESULTS: The consensus panel found 265 non-calcified nodules ≤ 30 mm (ground-glass opacity [GGO], 103; part-solid, 34; and solid, 128). CAD sensitivity was significantly higher at 100%-ASIR [clinical routine-dose CT, 71% (overall), 49% (GGO); lower-dose CT, 52% (overall), 67% (solid)] than at 0%-ASIR [clinical routine-dose CT, 54% (overall), 25% (GGO); lower-dose CT, 36% (overall), 50% (solid)] (p<0.001). Mean number of false-positive findings per examination was significantly higher at 100%-ASIR (clinical routine-dose CT, 8.5; lower-dose CT, 6.2) than at 0%-ASIR (clinical routine-dose CT, 4.6; lower-dose CT, 3.5; p<0.001). Effective doses were 10.77 ± 3.41 mSv in clinical routine-dose CT and 2.67 ± 0.17 mSv in lower-dose CT. CONCLUSION: CAD sensitivity at 100%-ASIR on lower-dose CT is almost equal to that at 0%-ASIR on clinical routine-dose CT. ASIR can increase CAD sensitivity despite increased false-positive findings.
Authors: B Schulz; M Beeres; B Bodelle; R Bauer; F Al-Butmeh; A Thalhammer; T J Vogl; J M Kerl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Martin J Willemink; Tim Leiner; Pim A de Jong; Linda M de Heer; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Arnold M R Schilham; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-01-16 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Martin J Willemink; Pim A de Jong; Tim Leiner; Linda M de Heer; Rutger A J Nievelstein; Ricardo P J Budde; Arnold M R Schilham Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2013-01-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Martin J Willemink; Arnold M R Schilham; Tim Leiner; Willem P Th M Mali; Pim A de Jong; Ricardo P J Budde Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2013-02-16
Authors: Martin J Willemink; Jaap Borstlap; Richard A P Takx; Arnold M R Schilham; Tim Leiner; Ricardo P J Budde; Pim A de Jong Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 3.240