OBJECTIVE: To compare contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) thresholds with visual assessment of low-contrast resolution (LCR) in filtered back projection (FBP) and iteratively reconstructed (IR) computed tomographic (CT) images. METHODS: American College of Radiology (ACR) CT accreditation phantom LCR images were acquired at CTDIvol levels of 8, 12, and 16 mGy using 2 scanner models and reconstructed using one FBP and 2 IR kernels. Acquisitions were repeated 100 times. Three board-certified medical physicists blindly reviewed the LCR section images. Pass-percentage rates (PPRs) using previous and current ACR CT accreditation criteria were compared. RESULTS: Observer PPRs for FBP images were less than 32%. For IR images, 5 of 18 settings/dose/model configurations had PPRs greater than 32% (maximum 76.3%). For CNR evaluation of FBP images, PPRs for 15 configurations were greater than 70%. For IR images, all PPRs were at least 96%. CONCLUSIONS: The CNR threshold used by the ACR CT accreditation program yields higher PPRs than visual assessment of LCR, potentially resulting in lower-quality images passing the ACR CNR criteria.
OBJECTIVE: To compare contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) thresholds with visual assessment of low-contrast resolution (LCR) in filtered back projection (FBP) and iteratively reconstructed (IR) computed tomographic (CT) images. METHODS: American College of Radiology (ACR) CT accreditation phantom LCR images were acquired at CTDIvol levels of 8, 12, and 16 mGy using 2 scanner models and reconstructed using one FBP and 2 IR kernels. Acquisitions were repeated 100 times. Three board-certified medical physicists blindly reviewed the LCR section images. Pass-percentage rates (PPRs) using previous and current ACR CT accreditation criteria were compared. RESULTS: Observer PPRs for FBP images were less than 32%. For IR images, 5 of 18 settings/dose/model configurations had PPRs greater than 32% (maximum 76.3%). For CNR evaluation of FBP images, PPRs for 15 configurations were greater than 70%. For IR images, all PPRs were at least 96%. CONCLUSIONS: The CNR threshold used by the ACR CT accreditation program yields higher PPRs than visual assessment of LCR, potentially resulting in lower-quality images passing the ACR CNR criteria.
Authors: Mark E Baker; Frank Dong; Andrew Primak; Nancy A Obuchowski; David Einstein; Namita Gandhi; Brian R Herts; Andrei Purysko; Erick Remer; Neil Vachhani; Neil Vachani Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Ajit H Goenka; Brian R Herts; Nancy A Obuchowski; Andrew N Primak; Frank Dong; Wadih Karim; Mark E Baker Journal: Radiology Date: 2014-03-10 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Lifeng Yu; Shuai Leng; Lingyun Chen; James M Kofler; Rickey E Carter; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: Med Phys Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Hao Gong; Qiyuan Hu; Andrew Walther; Chi Wan Koo; Edwin A Takahashi; David L Levin; Tucker F Johnson; Megan J Hora; Shuai Leng; Joel G Fletcher; Cynthia H McCollough; Lifeng Yu Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2020-06-30
Authors: Christopher P Favazza; Andrea Ferrero; Lifeng Yu; Shuai Leng; Kyle L McMillan; Cynthia H McCollough Journal: J Med Imaging (Bellingham) Date: 2017-10-03
Authors: Hao Gong; Joel G Fletcher; Jay P Heiken; Michael L Wells; Shuai Leng; Cynthia H McCollough; Lifeng Yu Journal: Med Phys Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 4.506