OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic performance of advanced modelled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE) to filtered back projection (FBP) when using an ultralow-dose protocol for the detection of solid and subsolid pulmonary nodules. METHODS: Single-energy CT was performed at 100 kVp with tin filtration in an anthropomorphic chest phantom with solid and subsolid pulmonary nodules (2-10 mm, attenuation, 20 to -800 HU at 120 kVp). The mean volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) of the standard chest protocol was 2.2 mGy. Subsequent scans were obtained at 1/8 (0.28 mGy), 1/20 (0.10 mGy) and 1/70 (0.03 mGy) dose levels by lowering tube voltage and tube current. Images were reconstructed with FBP and ADMIRE. One reader measured image noise; two readers determined image quality and assessed nodule localization. RESULTS: Image noise was significantly reduced using ADMIRE compared with FBP (ADMIRE at a strength level of 5 : 70.4% for 1/20; 71.6% for 1/8; p < 0.001). Interobserver agreement for image quality was excellent (k = 0.88). Image quality was considered diagnostic for all images at 1/20 dose using ADMIRE. Sensitivity of nodule detection was 97.1% (100% for solid, 93.8% for subsolid nodules) at 1/20 dose and 100% for both nodule entities at 1/8 dose using ADMIRE 5. Images obtained with 1/70 dose had moderate sensitivity (overall 85.7%; solid 95%; subsolid 73.3%). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that with a combination of tin filtration and ADMIRE, the CTDIvol of chest CT can be lowered considerably, while sensitivity for nodule detection remains high. For solid nodules, CTDIvol was 0.10 mGy, while subsolid nodules required a slightly higher CTDIvol of 0.28 mGy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Detection of subsolid nodules is feasible with ultralow-dose protocols.
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the diagnostic performance of advanced modelled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE) to filtered back projection (FBP) when using an ultralow-dose protocol for the detection of solid and subsolid pulmonary nodules. METHODS: Single-energy CT was performed at 100 kVp with tin filtration in an anthropomorphic chest phantom with solid and subsolid pulmonary nodules (2-10 mm, attenuation, 20 to -800 HU at 120 kVp). The mean volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) of the standard chest protocol was 2.2 mGy. Subsequent scans were obtained at 1/8 (0.28 mGy), 1/20 (0.10 mGy) and 1/70 (0.03 mGy) dose levels by lowering tube voltage and tube current. Images were reconstructed with FBP and ADMIRE. One reader measured image noise; two readers determined image quality and assessed nodule localization. RESULTS: Image noise was significantly reduced using ADMIRE compared with FBP (ADMIRE at a strength level of 5 : 70.4% for 1/20; 71.6% for 1/8; p < 0.001). Interobserver agreement for image quality was excellent (k = 0.88). Image quality was considered diagnostic for all images at 1/20 dose using ADMIRE. Sensitivity of nodule detection was 97.1% (100% for solid, 93.8% for subsolid nodules) at 1/20 dose and 100% for both nodule entities at 1/8 dose using ADMIRE 5. Images obtained with 1/70 dose had moderate sensitivity (overall 85.7%; solid 95%; subsolid 73.3%). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that with a combination of tin filtration and ADMIRE, the CTDIvol of chest CT can be lowered considerably, while sensitivity for nodule detection remains high. For solid nodules, CTDIvol was 0.10 mGy, while subsolid nodules required a slightly higher CTDIvol of 0.28 mGy. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Detection of subsolid nodules is feasible with ultralow-dose protocols.
Authors: Heber MacMahon; John H M Austin; Gordon Gamsu; Christian J Herold; James R Jett; David P Naidich; Edward F Patz; Stephen J Swensen Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Matthew D Gilman; Jiang Hsieh; Homer H Pien; Subba R Digumarthy; Jo-Anne O Shepard Journal: Radiology Date: 2011-03-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael M Maher; Thomas L Toth; Bernhard Schmidt; Bryan L Westerman; Hugh T Morgan; Sanjay Saini Journal: Radiology Date: 2004-10-21 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: A Euler; T Heye; M Kekelidze; G Bongartz; Z Szucs-Farkas; C Sommer; B Schmidt; Sebastian T Schindera Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2014-10-15 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Michael Messerli; Andreas A Giannopoulos; Sebastian Leschka; René Warschkow; Simon Wildermuth; Lukas Hechelhammer; Ralf W Bauer Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-10-03 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Matthias Eberhard; Daniel Stocker; Gianluca Milanese; Katharina Martini; Thi Dan Linh Nguyen-Kim; Moritz C Wurnig; Thomas Frauenfelder; Stephan Baumueller Journal: J Thorac Dis Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: Eva Korcakova; Jana Stepankova; David Suchy; Petr Hosek; Kristyna Bajcurova; Jan Pernicky; Hynek Mirka Journal: Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub Date: 2021-02-04 Impact factor: 1.245
Authors: Caroline Alexandra Burgard; Thomas Gaass; Madeleine Bonert; David Bondesson; Natalie Thaens; Maximilian Ferdinand Reiser; Julien Dinkel Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Matthias Wetzl; Matthias S May; Daniel Weinmann; Matthias Hammon; Christoph Treutlein; Martin Zeilinger; Alexander Kiefer; Regina Trollmann; Joachim Woelfle; Michael Uder; Oliver Rompel Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2020-06-17