PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of reduced-dose abdominal computed tomographic (CT) imaging by using a new generation model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) to diagnose acute renal colic compared with a standard-dose abdominal CT with 50% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved prospective study included 118 patients with symptoms of acute renal colic who underwent the following two successive CT examinations: standard-dose ASIR 50% and reduced-dose MBIR. Two radiologists independently reviewed both CT examinations for presence or absence of renal calculi, differential diagnoses, and associated abnormalities. The imaging findings, radiation dose estimates, and image quality of the two CT reconstruction methods were compared. Concordance was evaluated by κ coefficient, and descriptive statistics and t test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Intraobserver correlation was 100% for the diagnosis of renal calculi (κ = 1). Renal calculus (τ = 98.7%; κ = 0.97) and obstructive upper urinary tract disease (τ = 98.16%; κ = 0.95) were detected, and differential or alternative diagnosis was performed (τ = 98.87% κ = 0.95). MBIR allowed a dose reduction of 84% versus standard-dose ASIR 50% (mean volume CT dose index, 1.7 mGy ± 0.8 [standard deviation] vs 10.9 mGy ± 4.6; mean size-specific dose estimate, 2.2 mGy ± 0.7 vs 13.7 mGy ± 3.9; P < .001) without a conspicuous deterioration in image quality (reduced-dose MBIR vs ASIR 50% mean scores, 3.83 ± 0.49 vs 3.92 ± 0.27, respectively; P = .32) or increase in noise (reduced-dose MBIR vs ASIR 50% mean, respectively, 18.36 HU ± 2.53 vs 17.40 HU ± 3.42). Its main drawback remains the long time required for reconstruction (mean, 40 minutes). CONCLUSION: A reduced-dose protocol with MBIR allowed a dose reduction of 84% without increasing noise and without an conspicuous deterioration in image quality in patients suspected of having renal colic.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the accuracy of reduced-dose abdominal computed tomographic (CT) imaging by using a new generation model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) to diagnose acute renal colic compared with a standard-dose abdominal CT with 50% adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This institutional review board-approved prospective study included 118 patients with symptoms of acute renal colic who underwent the following two successive CT examinations: standard-dose ASIR 50% and reduced-dose MBIR. Two radiologists independently reviewed both CT examinations for presence or absence of renal calculi, differential diagnoses, and associated abnormalities. The imaging findings, radiation dose estimates, and image quality of the two CT reconstruction methods were compared. Concordance was evaluated by κ coefficient, and descriptive statistics and t test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Intraobserver correlation was 100% for the diagnosis of renal calculi (κ = 1). Renal calculus (τ = 98.7%; κ = 0.97) and obstructive upper urinary tract disease (τ = 98.16%; κ = 0.95) were detected, and differential or alternative diagnosis was performed (τ = 98.87% κ = 0.95). MBIR allowed a dose reduction of 84% versus standard-dose ASIR 50% (mean volume CT dose index, 1.7 mGy ± 0.8 [standard deviation] vs 10.9 mGy ± 4.6; mean size-specific dose estimate, 2.2 mGy ± 0.7 vs 13.7 mGy ± 3.9; P < .001) without a conspicuous deterioration in image quality (reduced-dose MBIR vs ASIR 50% mean scores, 3.83 ± 0.49 vs 3.92 ± 0.27, respectively; P = .32) or increase in noise (reduced-dose MBIR vs ASIR 50% mean, respectively, 18.36 HU ± 2.53 vs 17.40 HU ± 3.42). Its main drawback remains the long time required for reconstruction (mean, 40 minutes). CONCLUSION: A reduced-dose protocol with MBIR allowed a dose reduction of 84% without increasing noise and without an conspicuous deterioration in image quality in patients suspected of having renal colic.
Authors: Pierre-Alexandre Poletti; Minerva Becker; Christoph D Becker; Alice Halfon Poletti; Olivier T Rutschmann; Habib Zaidi; Thomas Perneger; Alexandra Platon Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-01-12 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Ji Hoon Park; Jong-June Jeon; Sung Soo Lee; Amar C Dhanantwari; Ji Ye Sim; Hae Young Kim; Kyoung Ho Lee Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-12-07 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Sean Tenant; Chun Lap Pang; Prageeth Dissanayake; Varut Vardhanabhuti; Colin Stuckey; Catherine Gutteridge; Christopher Hyde; Carl Roobottom Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 5.315