OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether iterative reconstruction improves the quality of cranial CT (CCT) images of stroke patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one CCT studies of patients with infarction performed with either a low (260 mAs; n = 21) or standard (340 mAs; n = 30) dose were reconstructed with both filtered back projection (FBP) and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) with five strength levels (S1-S5). The resulting six image sets (one FBP and one each for SAFIRE levels S1-S5) were rated separately by two blinded radiologists in terms of conspicuity of infarcted areas on a 5-point scale. Noise and infarct-to-normal brain as well as medullary-to-cortical contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were measured. Ratings, noise, and CNRs were intraindividually compared within the same dose group (Fisher exact test) and interindividually between the different dose groups (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U test). RESULTS: The strength level S4 showed the best conspicuity of infarcted areas. Compared with FBP, SAFIRE S4 statistically significantly (p < 0.01) reduced noise and improved CNRs without statistically significant differences in all subjective and objective criteria (p > 0.01) when the dose was reduced. Patients examined with a 260-mAs low-dose were exposed to a statistically significantly lower dose (1.77 vs 2.33 mSv; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION:Iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE at strength level S4) leads to increased subjective and objective image quality in CCT and allows dose reduction (-24%) without losses in the demarcation of ischemic lesions.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether iterative reconstruction improves the quality of cranial CT (CCT) images of strokepatients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one CCT studies of patients with infarction performed with either a low (260 mAs; n = 21) or standard (340 mAs; n = 30) dose were reconstructed with both filtered back projection (FBP) and sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) with five strength levels (S1-S5). The resulting six image sets (one FBP and one each for SAFIRE levels S1-S5) were rated separately by two blinded radiologists in terms of conspicuity of infarcted areas on a 5-point scale. Noise and infarct-to-normal brain as well as medullary-to-cortical contrast-to-noise ratios (CNRs) were measured. Ratings, noise, and CNRs were intraindividually compared within the same dose group (Fisher exact test) and interindividually between the different dose groups (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney U test). RESULTS: The strength level S4 showed the best conspicuity of infarcted areas. Compared with FBP, SAFIRE S4 statistically significantly (p < 0.01) reduced noise and improved CNRs without statistically significant differences in all subjective and objective criteria (p > 0.01) when the dose was reduced. Patients examined with a 260-mAs low-dose were exposed to a statistically significantly lower dose (1.77 vs 2.33 mSv; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE at strength level S4) leads to increased subjective and objective image quality in CCT and allows dose reduction (-24%) without losses in the demarcation of ischemic lesions.