Literature DB >> 23392194

Noise-reducing algorithms do not necessarily provide superior dose optimisation for hepatic lesion detection with multidetector CT.

K L Dobeli1, S J Lewis, S R Meikle, D L Thiele, P C Brennan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare the dose-optimisation potential of a smoothing filtered backprojection (FBP) and a hybrid FBP/iterative algorithm to that of a standard FBP algorithm at three slice thicknesses for hepatic lesion detection with multidetector CT.
METHODS: A liver phantom containing a 9.5-mm opacity with a density of 10 HU below background was scanned at 125, 100, 75, 50 and 25 mAs. Data were reconstructed with standard FBP (B), smoothing FBP (A) and hybrid FBP/iterative (iDose(4)) algorithms at 5-, 3- and 1-mm collimation. 10 observers marked opacities using a four-point confidence scale. Jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic figure of merit (FOM), sensitivity and noise were calculated.
RESULTS: Compared with the 125-mAs/5-mm setting for each algorithm, significant reductions in FOM (p<0.05) and sensitivity (p<0.05) were found for all three algorithms for all exposures at 1-mm thickness and for all slice thicknesses at 25 mAs, with the exception of the 25-mAs/5-mm setting for the B algorithm. Sensitivity was also significantly reduced for all exposures at 3-mm thickness for the A algorithm (p<0.05). Noise for the A and iDose(4) algorithms was approximately 13% and 21% lower, respectively, than for the B algorithm.
CONCLUSION: Superior performance for hepatic lesion detection was not shown with either a smoothing FBP algorithm or a hybrid FBP/iterative algorithm compared with a standard FBP technique, even though noise reduction with thinner slices was demonstrated with the alternative approaches. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Reductions in image noise with non-standard CT algorithms do not necessarily translate to an improvement in low-contrast object detection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23392194      PMCID: PMC3608061          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20120500

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  37 in total

Review 1.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Iterative reconstruction reduces abdominal CT dose.

Authors:  Anne Catrine Trægde Martinsen; Hilde Kjernlie Sæther; Per Kristian Hol; Dag Rune Olsen; Per Skaane
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2011-05-02       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 3.  Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm.

Authors:  Alvin C Silva; Holly J Lawder; Amy Hara; Jennifer Kujak; William Pavlicek
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.959

4.  Estimated risks of radiation-induced fatal cancer from pediatric CT.

Authors:  D Brenner; C Elliston; E Hall; W Berdon
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Contrast-to-noise ratio and low-contrast object resolution on full- and low-dose MDCT: SAFIRE versus filtered back projection in a low-contrast object phantom and in the liver.

Authors:  Mark E Baker; Frank Dong; Andrew Primak; Nancy A Obuchowski; David Einstein; Namita Gandhi; Brian R Herts; Andrei Purysko; Erick Remer; Neil Vachhani; Neil Vachani
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Iterative reconstruction methods in two different MDCT scanners: physical metrics and 4-alternative forced-choice detectability experiments--a phantom approach.

Authors:  Frédéric A Miéville; François Gudinchet; Francis Brunelle; François O Bochud; Francis R Verdun
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2012-01-02       Impact factor: 2.685

7.  Detection of liver metastases under 2 cm: comparison of different acquisition protocols in four row multidetector-CT (MDCT).

Authors:  Amina Abdelmoumene; Patrick Chevallier; Marc Chalaron; Frédéric Schneider; Francis R Verdun; Phillipe Frascarolo; Reto Meuli; Pierre Schnyder; Alban Denys
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2005-05-03       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  A prospective evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in chest CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction.

Authors:  Jonathon Leipsic; Giang Nguyen; Jaqueline Brown; Don Sin; John R Mayo
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.959

9.  Effect of noise correlation on detectability of disk signals in medical imaging.

Authors:  K J Myers; H H Barrett; M C Borgstrom; D D Patton; G W Seeley
Journal:  J Opt Soc Am A       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 2.129

10.  The frequency and significance of small (less than or equal to 15 mm) hepatic lesions detected by CT.

Authors:  E C Jones; J L Chezmar; R C Nelson; M E Bernardino
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Dose reduction in pediatric abdominal CT: use of iterative reconstruction techniques across different CT platforms.

Authors:  Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja; Sarabjeet Singh; Alexi Otrakji; Atul Padole; Ruth Lim; Katherine Nimkin; Sjirk Westra; Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael S Gee
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2014-11-27

2.  Comparing five different iterative reconstruction algorithms for computed tomography in an ROC study.

Authors:  Kristin Jensen; Anne Catrine T Martinsen; Anders Tingberg; Trond Mogens Aaløkken; Erik Fosse
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-07-22       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Assessment of Low-Contrast Resolution for the American College of Radiology Computed Tomographic Accreditation Program: What Is the Impact of Iterative Reconstruction?

Authors:  James M Kofler; Lifeng Yu; Shuai Leng; Yi Zhang; Zhoubo Li; Rickey E Carter; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.826

4.  Tilted-wire method for measuring resolution properties of CT images under extremely low-contrast and high-noise conditions.

Authors:  Chiaki Tominaga; Hiroki Azumi; Mitsunori Goto; Masaaki Taura; Noriyasu Homma; Issei Mori
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2018-02-23

5.  Dose Reduction While Preserving Diagnostic Quality in Head CT: Advancing the Application of Iterative Reconstruction Using a Live Animal Model.

Authors:  F D Raslau; E J Escott; J Smiley; C Adams; D Feigal; H Ganesh; C Wang; J Zhang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2019-10-10       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Prospective Evaluation of Reduced Dose Computed Tomography for the Detection of Low-Contrast Liver Lesions: Direct Comparison with Concurrent Standard Dose Imaging.

Authors:  B Dustin Pooler; Meghan G Lubner; David H Kim; Oliver T Chen; Ke Li; Guang-Hong Chen; Perry J Pickhardt
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-05       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Impact of hybrid iterative reconstruction on unenhanced liver CT.

Authors:  Masatoshi Kondo; Akihiro Nishie; Nobuhiro Fujita; Koichiro Morita; Takashi Shirasaka; Hisao Arimura; Yasuhiko Nakamura; Hiroshi Honda
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Detection of Colorectal Hepatic Metastases Is Superior at Standard Radiation Dose CT versus Reduced Dose CT.

Authors:  Corey T Jensen; Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak; Lan N Vu; Xinming Liu; Bharat Raval; David Martinez; Wei Wei; Yuan Cheng; Ehsan Samei; Shiva Gupta
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Observer Performance with Varying Radiation Dose and Reconstruction Methods for Detection of Hepatic Metastases.

Authors:  Joel G Fletcher; Jeff L Fidler; Sudhakar K Venkatesh; David M Hough; Naoki Takahashi; Lifeng Yu; Matthew Johnson; Shuai Leng; David R Holmes; Rickey Carter; Cynthia H McCollough
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2018-09-11       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Michael Scharf; Stephanie Brendel; Katja Melzer; Christian Hentschke; Matthias May; Michael Uder; Michael M Lell
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.