Ryne A Didier1, Petra L Vajtai, Katharine L Hopkins. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, DC7R, Oregon Health & Science University, 3181 S.W. Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Iterative reconstruction technique has been proposed as a means of reducing patient radiation dose in pediatric CT. Yet, the effect of such reductions on diagnostic accuracy has not been thoroughly evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This study compares accuracy of diagnosing pediatric acute appendicitis using contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans performed with traditional pediatric weight-based protocols and filtered back projection reconstruction vs. a filtered back projection/iterative reconstruction technique blend with reduced volume CT dose index (CTDIvol). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Results of pediatric contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans done for pain and/or suspected appendicitis were reviewed in two groups: A, 192 scans performed with the hospital's established weight-based CT protocols and filtered back projection reconstruction; B, 194 scans performed with iterative reconstruction technique and reduced CTDIvol. Reduced CTDIvol was achieved primarily by reductions in effective tube current-time product (mAseff) and tube peak kilovoltage (kVp). CT interpretation was correlated with clinical follow-up and/or surgical pathology. CTDIvol, size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) and performance characteristics of the two CT techniques were then compared. RESULTS: Between groups A and B, mean CTDIvol was reduced by 45%, and mean SSDE was reduced by 46%. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy were 96%, 97% and 96% in group A vs. 100%, 99% and 99% in group B. CONCLUSION: Accuracy in diagnosing pediatric acute appendicitis was maintained in contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans that incorporated iterative reconstruction technique, despite reductions in mean CTDIvol and SSDE by nearly half as compared to the hospital's traditional weight-based protocols.
BACKGROUND: Iterative reconstruction technique has been proposed as a means of reducing patient radiation dose in pediatric CT. Yet, the effect of such reductions on diagnostic accuracy has not been thoroughly evaluated. OBJECTIVE: This study compares accuracy of diagnosing pediatric acute appendicitis using contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans performed with traditional pediatric weight-based protocols and filtered back projection reconstruction vs. a filtered back projection/iterative reconstruction technique blend with reduced volume CT dose index (CTDIvol). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Results of pediatric contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans done for pain and/or suspected appendicitis were reviewed in two groups: A, 192 scans performed with the hospital's established weight-based CT protocols and filtered back projection reconstruction; B, 194 scans performed with iterative reconstruction technique and reduced CTDIvol. Reduced CTDIvol was achieved primarily by reductions in effective tube current-time product (mAseff) and tube peak kilovoltage (kVp). CT interpretation was correlated with clinical follow-up and/or surgical pathology. CTDIvol, size-specific dose estimates (SSDE) and performance characteristics of the two CT techniques were then compared. RESULTS: Between groups A and B, mean CTDIvol was reduced by 45%, and mean SSDE was reduced by 46%. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy were 96%, 97% and 96% in group A vs. 100%, 99% and 99% in group B. CONCLUSION: Accuracy in diagnosing pediatric acute appendicitis was maintained in contrast-enhanced abdominopelvic CT scans that incorporated iterative reconstruction technique, despite reductions in mean CTDIvol and SSDE by nearly half as compared to the hospital's traditional weight-based protocols.
Authors: Marilyn J Siegel; Bernhard Schmidt; David Bradley; Christoph Suess; Charles Hildebolt Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-09-09 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Andrea S Doria; Rahim Moineddin; Christian J Kellenberger; Monica Epelman; Joseph Beyene; Suzanne Schuh; Paul S Babyn; Paul T Dick Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-08-23 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kimberly Garcia; Marta Hernanz-Schulman; Debbie Lee Bennett; Stephen E Morrow; Chang Yu; J Herman Kan Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Ryne A Didier; Katharine L Hopkins; Fergus V Coakley; Sanjay Krishnaswami; David M Spiro; Bryan R Foster Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2017-06-19
Authors: Y Matsunaga; A Kawaguchi; K Kobayashi; Y Kinomura; M Kobayashi; Y Asada; K Minami; S Suzuki; K Chida Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2015-06-04 Impact factor: 3.039