Literature DB >> 25055268

Model-based iterative reconstruction versus adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in low-dose abdominal CT for urolithiasis.

Diomidis Botsikas1, Salvatore Stefanelli, Sana Boudabbous, Seema Toso, Christoph D Becker, Xavier Montet.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether there is added benefit to model-based iterative reconstruction as compared with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction on low-dose abdominal CT in the clinical context of known or suspected urolithiasis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-three consecutive patients (35 men, 18 women; mean [SD] age, 52.3 ± 16.6 years) underwent unenhanced low-dose abdominal CT for detection or follow-up of urinary tract stones. Ureteral definition was evaluated subjectively by two blinded readers who scored it from 1 (excellent definition) to 4 (not distinguishable) and objectively by calculating contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for soft tissue and fat on a standard 40% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and on the corresponding model-based iterative reconstruction series. The position, maximal density, and diameter on the axial plane of stones were also evaluated on both series.
RESULTS: There was an almost perfect agreement (κ = 0.872) between readers for subjective evaluation of ureteral definition. The ureteral definition was significantly better for the model-based iterative reconstruction series (mean [SD] score, 1.998 ± 0.839) compared with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (mean score, 2.536 ± 0.799) (p < 0.0001). Mean CNR was significantly better on the model-based iterative reconstruction (17.82 ± 4.84) compared with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (6.066 ± 1.985) (p < 0.0001). Sixty-nine stones were found in total. Their maximal density measured from model-based iterative reconstruction was significantly higher (754.4 ± 376.5 HU) than that measured from adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (559.4 ± 352.4 HU) (p < 0.0001). Size of stones was overevaluated on model-based iterative reconstruction (mean diameter, 4.91 ± 2.61 mm) compared with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (4.52 ± 2.63 mm) (p < 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Model-based iterative reconstruction of low-dose abdominal CT can offer significantly better ureteral definition than adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and its systematic use could thus be recommended. However, it has the tendency to systematically overevaluate the stones' densities and sizes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  MDCT; iterative reconstruction; model-based iterative reconstruction; urinary stones; urinary tract calculi

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25055268     DOI: 10.2214/AJR.13.11937

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol        ISSN: 0361-803X            Impact factor:   3.959


  9 in total

1.  Impact of model-based iterative reconstruction on low-contrast lesion detection and image quality in abdominal CT: a 12-reader-based comparative phantom study with filtered back projection at different tube voltages.

Authors:  André Euler; Bram Stieltjes; Zsolt Szucs-Farkas; Reto Eichenberger; Clemens Reisinger; Anna Hirschmann; Caroline Zaehringer; Achim Kircher; Matthias Streif; Sabine Bucher; David Buergler; Luigia D'Errico; Sebastién Kopp; Markus Wilhelm; Sebastian T Schindera
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-04-03       Impact factor: 5.315

2.  Impact of iterative reconstructions on objective and subjective emphysema assessment with computed tomography: a prospective study.

Authors:  Steve P Martin; Joanna Gariani; Anne-Lise Hachulla; Diomidis Botsikas; Dan Adler; Wolfram Karenovics; Christoph D Becker; Xavier Montet
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-11-15       Impact factor: 5.315

3.  Effect of ultra-low doses, ASIR and MBIR on density and noise levels of MDCT images of dental implant sites.

Authors:  Gerlig Widmann; Reema Al-Shawaf; Peter Schullian; Ra'ed Al-Sadhan; Romed Hörmann; Asma'a A Al-Ekrish
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  Effect of iterative reconstruction techniques on image quality in low radiation dose chest CT: a phantom study.

Authors:  Yan Xu; Ting-Ting Zhang; Zhi-Hai Hu; Juan Li; Hong-Jun Hou; Zu-Shan Xu; Wen He
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.630

5.  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

6.  Application of computed tomography virtual noncontrast spectral imaging in evaluation of hepatic metastases: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Shi-Feng Tian; Ai-Lian Liu; Jing-Hong Liu; Mei-Yu Sun; He-Qing Wang; Yi-Jun Liu
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 2.628

7.  Radiation dose reduction for CT assessment of urolithiasis using iterative reconstruction: A prospective intra-individual study.

Authors:  Annemarie M den Harder; Martin J Willemink; Pieter J van Doormaal; Frank J Wessels; M T W T Lock; Arnold M R Schilham; Ricardo P J Budde; Tim Leiner; Pim A de Jong
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 8.  Ultralow Dose MSCT Imaging in Dental Implantology.

Authors:  Gerlig Widmann; Asma'a A Al-Ekrish
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2018-01-31

9.  Metallic artifact reduction by evaluation of the additional value of iterative reconstruction algorithms in hip prosthesis computed tomography imaging.

Authors:  Angeliki Neroladaki; Steve Philippe Martin; Ilias Bagetakos; Diomidis Botsikas; Marion Hamard; Xavier Montet; Sana Boudabbous
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.