Hyun Jeong Park1, Jeong Min Lee, Sung Bin Park, Jong Beum Lee, Yoong Ki Jeong, Jeong Hee Yoon. 1. From the *Department of Radiology, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea, †Department of Radiology and the Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; and ‡Department of Radiology, Ulsan University Hospital, Ulsan University College of Medicine, Ulsan, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the image quality, lesion conspicuity, and dose reduction provided by knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR) in computed tomography (CT) of the liver compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) and filtered back projection (FBP) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Fifty-six patients with 61 HCCs who underwent multiphasic reduced-dose CT (RDCT; n = 33) or standard-dose CT (SDCT; n = 28) were retrospectively evaluated. Reconstructed images with FBP, hybrid IR (iDose), IMR were evaluated for image quality using CT attenuation and image noise. Objective and subjective image quality of RDCT and SDCT sets were independently assessed by 2 observers in a blinded manner. RESULTS: Image quality and lesion conspicuity were better with IMR for both RDCT and SDCT than either FBP or IR (P < 0.001). Contrast-to-noise ratio of HCCs in IMR-RDCT was significantly higher on delayed phase (DP) (P < 0.001), and comparable on arterial phase, than with IR-SDCT (P = 0.501). Iterative model reconstruction RDCT was significantly superior to FBP-SDCT (P < 0.001). Compared with IR-SDCT, IMR-RDCT was comparable in image sharpness and tumor conspicuity on arterial phase, and superior in image quality, noise, and lesion conspicuity on DP. With the use of IMR, a 27% reduction of effective dose was achieved with RDCT (12.7 ± 0.6 mSv) compared with SDCT (17.4 ± 1.1 mSv) without loss of image quality (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Iterative model reconstruction provides better image quality and tumor conspicuity than FBP and IR with considerable noise reduction. In addition, more than comparable results were achieved with IMR-RDCT to IR-SDCT for the evaluation of HCCs.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this work was to evaluate the image quality, lesion conspicuity, and dose reduction provided by knowledge-based iterative model reconstruction (IMR) in computed tomography (CT) of the liver compared with hybrid iterative reconstruction (IR) and filtered back projection (FBP) in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Fifty-six patients with 61 HCCs who underwent multiphasic reduced-dose CT (RDCT; n = 33) or standard-dose CT (SDCT; n = 28) were retrospectively evaluated. Reconstructed images with FBP, hybrid IR (iDose), IMR were evaluated for image quality using CT attenuation and image noise. Objective and subjective image quality of RDCT and SDCT sets were independently assessed by 2 observers in a blinded manner. RESULTS: Image quality and lesion conspicuity were better with IMR for both RDCT and SDCT than either FBP or IR (P < 0.001). Contrast-to-noise ratio of HCCs in IMR-RDCT was significantly higher on delayed phase (DP) (P < 0.001), and comparable on arterial phase, than with IR-SDCT (P = 0.501). Iterative model reconstruction RDCT was significantly superior to FBP-SDCT (P < 0.001). Compared with IR-SDCT, IMR-RDCT was comparable in image sharpness and tumor conspicuity on arterial phase, and superior in image quality, noise, and lesion conspicuity on DP. With the use of IMR, a 27% reduction of effective dose was achieved with RDCT (12.7 ± 0.6 mSv) compared with SDCT (17.4 ± 1.1 mSv) without loss of image quality (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Iterative model reconstruction provides better image quality and tumor conspicuity than FBP and IR with considerable noise reduction. In addition, more than comparable results were achieved with IMR-RDCT to IR-SDCT for the evaluation of HCCs.
Authors: Marco Calandri; Valeria Ruggeri; Patrizia Carucci; Stefano Mirabella; Andrea Veltri; Paolo Fonio; Carlo Gazzera Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2019-07-03 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Hyo-Jin Kang; Jeong Min Lee; Sang Min Lee; Hyun Kyung Yang; Ri Hyeon Kim; Ju Gang Nam; Aruna Karnawat; Joon Koo Han Journal: BMC Med Imaging Date: 2019-08-28 Impact factor: 1.930