Literature DB >> 24049128

Six iterative reconstruction algorithms in brain CT: a phantom study on image quality at different radiation dose levels.

A Löve1, M-L Olsson, R Siemund, F Stålhammar, I M Björkman-Burtscher, M Söderberg.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the image quality produced by six different iterative reconstruction (IR) algorithms in four CT systems in the setting of brain CT, using different radiation dose levels and iterative image optimisation levels.
METHODS: An image quality phantom, supplied with a bone mimicking annulus, was examined using four CT systems from different vendors and four radiation dose levels. Acquisitions were reconstructed using conventional filtered back-projection (FBP), three levels of statistical IR and, when available, a model-based IR algorithm. The evaluated image quality parameters were CT numbers, uniformity, noise, noise-power spectra, low-contrast resolution and spatial resolution.
RESULTS: Compared with FBP, noise reduction was achieved by all six IR algorithms at all radiation dose levels, with further improvement seen at higher IR levels. Noise-power spectra revealed changes in noise distribution relative to the FBP for most statistical IR algorithms, especially the two model-based IR algorithms. Compared with FBP, variable degrees of improvements were seen in both objective and subjective low-contrast resolutions for all IR algorithms. Spatial resolution was improved with both model-based IR algorithms and one of the statistical IR algorithms.
CONCLUSION: The four statistical IR algorithms evaluated in the study all improved the general image quality compared with FBP, with improvement seen for most or all evaluated quality criteria. Further improvement was achieved with one of the model-based IR algorithms. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: The six evaluated IR algorithms all improve the image quality in brain CT but show different strengths and weaknesses.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24049128      PMCID: PMC3830436          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20130388

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


  19 in total

1.  Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection (Part 2): image quality of low-dose CT examinations in 80 patients.

Authors:  François Pontana; Alain Duhamel; Julien Pagniez; Thomas Flohr; Jean-Baptiste Faivre; Anne-Lise Hachulla; Jacques Remy; Martine Remy-Jardin
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 2.  Bias in research studies.

Authors:  Gregory T Sica
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  A software tool for increased efficiency in observer performance studies in radiology.

Authors:  Sara Börjesson; Markus Håkansson; Magnus Båth; Susanne Kheddache; Sune Svensson; Anders Tingberg; Anna Grahn; Mark Ruschin; Bengt Hemdal; Sören Mattsson; Lars Gunnar Månsson
Journal:  Radiat Prot Dosimetry       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 0.972

4.  Lowering the dose in head CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction.

Authors:  K Kilic; G Erbas; M Guryildirim; M Arac; E Ilgit; B Coskun
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Comparison of pure and hybrid iterative reconstruction techniques with conventional filtered back projection: image quality assessment in the cervicothoracic region.

Authors:  Masaki Katsura; Jiro Sato; Masaaki Akahane; Izuru Matsuda; Masanori Ishida; Koichiro Yasaka; Akira Kunimatsu; Kuni Ohtomo
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2012-11-27       Impact factor: 3.528

6.  Assessment of image quality on effects of varying tube voltage and automatic tube current modulation with hybrid and pure iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal/pelvic CT: a phantom study.

Authors:  Varut Vardhanabhuti; Robert Loader; Carl A Roobottom
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 6.016

7.  Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography Part 1: technical principles.

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

8.  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

9.  Bias in analytic research.

Authors:  D L Sackett
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1979

10.  Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study.

Authors:  Amy K Hara; Robert G Paden; Alvin C Silva; Jennifer L Kujak; Holly J Lawder; William Pavlicek
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.959

View more
  40 in total

1.  Knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction: comparative image quality and radiation dose with a pediatric computed tomography phantom.

Authors:  Young Jin Ryu; Young Hun Choi; Jung-Eun Cheon; Seongmin Ha; Woo Sun Kim; In-One Kim
Journal:  Pediatr Radiol       Date:  2015-11-06

2.  Image quality and dose optimisation for infant CT using a paediatric phantom.

Authors:  Jack W Lambert; Andrew S Phelps; Jesse L Courtier; Robert G Gould; John D MacKenzie
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-08-26       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Feasibility study of low tube voltage (80 kVp) coronary CT angiography combined with contrast medium reduction using iterative model reconstruction (IMR) on standard BMI patients.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Li Yang; Xiang Song; Ying-Na Li; Yan Jiang; Xing-Hua Zhang; Hai-Yue Ju; Jian Wu; Rui-Ping Chang
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Comparison of iterative model, hybrid iterative, and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques in low-dose brain CT: impact of thin-slice imaging.

Authors:  Takeshi Nakaura; Yuji Iyama; Masafumi Kidoh; Koichi Yokoyama; Seitaro Oda; Shinichi Tokuyasu; Kazunori Harada; Yasuyuki Yamashita
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2015-12-29       Impact factor: 2.804

5.  Radiation dose optimization for the bolus tracking technique in abdominal computed tomography: usefulness of real-time iterative reconstruction for monitoring scan.

Authors:  Yuya Ishikawa; Atsushi Urikura; Tsukasa Yoshida; Keisuke Takiguchi; Yoshihiro Nakaya
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-09-30

6.  Image quality of iterative reconstruction in cranial CT imaging: comparison of model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR).

Authors:  S Notohamiprodjo; Z Deak; F Meurer; F Maertz; F G Mueck; L L Geyer; S Wirth
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-08-06       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  Clinically essential requirement for brain CT with iterative reconstruction: author reply.

Authors:  A Löve; M-L Olsson; R Siemund; F Stålhammar; I M Björkman-Burtscher; M Söderberg
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  CT reconstruction algorithms affect histogram and texture analysis: evidence for liver parenchyma, focal solid liver lesions, and renal cysts.

Authors:  Su Joa Ahn; Jung Hoon Kim; Sang Min Lee; Sang Joon Park; Joon Koo Han
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Determination of optimal imaging settings for urolithiasis CT using filtered back projection (FBP), statistical iterative reconstruction (IR) and knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR): a physical human phantom study.

Authors:  Se Y Choi; Seung H Ahn; Jae D Choi; Jung H Kim; Byoung-Il Lee; Jeong-In Kim; Sung B Park
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 3.039

10.  Could new reconstruction CT techniques challenge MRI for the detection of brain metastases in the context of initial lung cancer staging?

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.