Literature DB >> 24368613

Image comparative assessment using iterative reconstructions: clinical comparison of low-dose abdominal/pelvic computed tomography between adaptive statistical, model-based iterative reconstructions and traditional filtered back projection in 65 patients.

Varut Vardhanabhuti1, Richard D Riordan, Grant R Mitchell, Christopher Hyde, Carl A Roobottom.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare image quality (objective and subjective parameters) and confidence in lesion detection between 3 image reconstruction algorithms in computed tomographic (CT) examinations of the abdomen/pelvis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective institutional review board-approved study included 65 patients (mean [SD] age, 71.3 ± 9 years; mean [SD] body mass index, 24.4 [4.8] kg) who underwent routine CT examinations of the abdomen/pelvis followed immediately by 2 low-dose scans. Raw data sets were reconstructed by using filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and a model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). Measurements of objective noise and CT numbers were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance. Six subjective image quality parameters were scored. Diagnostic confidence and accuracy in detection of various elementary lesions were performed.
RESULTS: Objectively, mean image noise for MBIR was significantly superior at all dose levels (P < 0.001). Subjectively, standard-dose ASIR and low-dose MBIR scans were better than standard-dose FBP scan in all parameters assessed (P < 0.05). Low-dose MBIR scans were comparable with standard-dose ASIR scans in all parameters except at noise index of 70 (approximately 85% dose reduction), where, in this case, the detection of liver lesions less than 5 mm were rated inferior (P < 0.05) with diagnostic accuracy reducing to 77.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose MBIR scan shows superior objective noise reduction compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. Subjectively, low-dose MBIR scans at 76% dose reduction were also superior compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. However, at dose reductions of 85%, small liver lesions may be missed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24368613     DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  24 in total

1.  Assessment of sub-milli-sievert abdominal computed tomography with iterative reconstruction techniques of different vendors.

Authors:  Atul Padole; Nisha Sainani; Diego Lira; Ranish Deedar Ali Khawaja; Sarvenaz Pourjabbar; Roberto Lo Gullo; Alexi Otrakji; Mannudeep K Kalra
Journal:  World J Radiol       Date:  2016-06-28

2.  Diagnostic usefulness  of low-dose lumbar multi-detector CT with iterative reconstruction in trauma patients: acomparison with standard-dose CT.

Authors:  Sun Hwa Lee; Seong Jong Yun; Dong Hyeon Kim; Hyeon Hwan Jo; Jae Gwang Song; Yong Sung Park
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Optimizing radiation dose by using advanced modelled iterative reconstruction in high-pitch coronary CT angiography.

Authors:  Sonja Gordic; Lotus Desbiolles; Martin Sedlmair; Robert Manka; André Plass; Bernhard Schmidt; Daniela B Husarik; Francesco Maisano; Simon Wildermuth; Hatem Alkadhi; Sebastian Leschka
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Potential of combining iterative reconstruction with noise efficient detector design: aggressive dose reduction in head CT.

Authors:  H Brodoefel; B Bender; C Schabel; M Fenchel; U Ernemann; A Korn
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  A comparison of linear interpolation models for iterative CT reconstruction.

Authors:  Katharina Hahn; Harald Schöndube; Karl Stierstorfer; Joachim Hornegger; Frédéric Noo
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  Full model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) in abdominal CT increases objective image quality, but decreases subjective acceptance.

Authors:  Gautier Laurent; Nicolas Villani; Gabriela Hossu; Aymeric Rauch; Alain Noël; Alain Blum; Pedro Augusto Gondim Teixeira
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  Imaging in rheumatoid arthritis: the role of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography.

Authors:  Mikkel Østergaard; Mikael Boesen
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2019-03-18       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Computed Tomography Image Quality Evaluation of a New Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm in the Abdomen (Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction-V) a Comparison With Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction, Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction, and Filtered Back Projection Reconstructions.

Authors:  Martin H Goodenberger; Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak; Shiva Gupta; Xinming Liu; Ramon Q Yap; Jia Sun; Eric P Tamm; Corey T Jensen
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2018 Mar/Apr       Impact factor: 1.826

9.  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

10.  Evaluation of Abdominal Computed Tomography Image Quality Using a New Version of Vendor-Specific Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction.

Authors:  Corey T Jensen; Morgan E Telesmanich; Nicolaus A Wagner-Bartak; Xinming Liu; John Rong; Janio Szklaruk; Aliya Qayyum; Wei Wei; Adam G Chandler; Eric P Tamm
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 1.826

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.