OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the imaging quality of head CT at lowered radiation dose by combining filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms. METHODS: Experimental group A (n = 66) underwent CT with 43 % tube current reduction, and group B (n = 58) received an equivalent reduced dose by lowering the tube voltage. An age- and sex-matched control group (n = 72) receiving the conventional radiation dose was retrospectively collected. Imaging for the control group was reconstructed by FBP only, while images for groups A and B were reconstructed by FBP and IR. The signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs), sharpness, number of infarcts and severity of subcortical arteriosclerotic encephalopathy (SAE) were compared to assess imaging quality and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in SNRs and CNRs between group A and the control group. There were significantly decreased SNRs and increased CNRs in group B. Image sharpness decreased in both groups. Correlations between detected infarcts and severity of SAE across FBP and IR were high (r = 0.73-0.93). Head diameter was the only significant factor inversely correlated with infratentorial imaging quality. CONCLUSION: Head CT with 43 % reduced tube current reconstructed by IR provides diagnostic imaging quality for outpatient management. KEY POINTS: • Cranial CT using iterative reconstruction provides diagnostic images with 43 % mAs reduction. • Blurring of infratentorial images becomes evident using low-radiation head CT. • Head diameter was inversely correlated with imaging quality in the infratentorium. • Lowering tube kilovoltage requires a higher radiation dose to maintain image quality.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the imaging quality of head CT at lowered radiation dose by combining filtered back projection (FBP) and iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms. METHODS: Experimental group A (n = 66) underwent CT with 43 % tube current reduction, and group B (n = 58) received an equivalent reduced dose by lowering the tube voltage. An age- and sex-matched control group (n = 72) receiving the conventional radiation dose was retrospectively collected. Imaging for the control group was reconstructed by FBP only, while images for groups A and B were reconstructed by FBP and IR. The signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs), sharpness, number of infarcts and severity of subcortical arteriosclerotic encephalopathy (SAE) were compared to assess imaging quality and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in SNRs and CNRs between group A and the control group. There were significantly decreased SNRs and increased CNRs in group B. Image sharpness decreased in both groups. Correlations between detected infarcts and severity of SAE across FBP and IR were high (r = 0.73-0.93). Head diameter was the only significant factor inversely correlated with infratentorial imaging quality. CONCLUSION: Head CT with 43 % reduced tube current reconstructed by IR provides diagnostic imaging quality for outpatient management. KEY POINTS: • Cranial CT using iterative reconstruction provides diagnostic images with 43 % mAs reduction. • Blurring of infratentorial images becomes evident using low-radiation head CT. • Head diameter was inversely correlated with imaging quality in the infratentorium. • Lowering tube kilovoltage requires a higher radiation dose to maintain image quality.
Authors: A Korn; M Fenchel; B Bender; S Danz; T K Hauser; D Ketelsen; T Flohr; C D Claussen; M Heuschmid; U Ernemann; H Brodoefel Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-10-27 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Peter B Noël; Alexander A Fingerle; Bernhard Renger; Daniela Münzel; Ernst J Rummeny; Martin Dobritz Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2011-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Bernhard Schmidt; Bryan L Westerman; Hugh T Morgan; Sanjay Saini Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Daniele Marin; Rendon C Nelson; Sebastian T Schindera; Samuel Richard; Richard S Youngblood; Terry T Yoshizumi; Ehsan Samei Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ahmed Othman; Hussam A Hamou; Rastislav Pjontek; Saif Afat; Hans Clusmann; Martin Wiesmann; Marc A Brockmann Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Guo Zhong Chen; Long Jiang Zhang; U Joseph Schoepf; Julian L Wichmann; Cole M Milliken; Chang Sheng Zhou; Li Qi; Song Luo; Guang Ming Lu Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2015-01-31 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: J G Fletcher; D R DeLone; A L Kotsenas; N G Campeau; V T Lehman; L Yu; S Leng; D R Holmes; P K Edwards; M P Johnson; G J Michalak; R E Carter; C H McCollough Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-10-24 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Fabian Henry Jürgen Elsholtz; Lars-Arne Schaafs; Christoph Erxleben; Bernd Hamm; Stefan Markus Niehues Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Domitille Millon; David Byl; Philippe Collard; Samantha E Cambier; Aline G Van Maanen; Alain Vlassenbroek; Emmanuel E Coche Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 5.315