OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and image quality of low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses using iterative reconstruction with adaptive-iterative dose reduction in three dimensions (AIDR 3D) in comparison with conventional image protocols of older scanner generations. METHODS: Sinus CT scans of 136 patients were assessed retrospectively. Patients underwent CT either with low-dose settings (Protocol A: 80 kV, 30 mA s; Protocol B: 120 kV, 15 mA s or C: 80 kV, 90 mA s) reconstructed using AIDR 3D (Protocols A and B) or filtered back projection (FBP) (Protocol C) or with standard dose (Protocol D: 120 kV, 80 mA s) and FBP. Image quality was assessed in consensus by two blinded readers scoring the diagnostic image quality (from 1 = excellent to 5 = non-diagnostic) and conspicuity of important anatomic landmarks (from 0 = not visible to 2 = completely visible; maximum score of 16 points) as well as osseous structures (maximum score of 12 points). Dose-length product, effective dose (ED), CT dose index and scan length were retrieved for each scan and compared. RESULTS: Mean ED could be lowered by 82% when using Protocol A. The best image quality was found using Protocol B (mean score = 2.1 ± 0.51). Conspicuity of relevant anatomic landmarks was best with Protocol A (mean score = 11.97 ± 1.88). Protocol B provided the highest conspicuity of osseous structures (mean score = 8.27 ± 1.58). Image noise was highest in images obtained using Protocol A. CONCLUSIONS: AIDR 3D allows a significant dose reduction while maintaining a good diagnostic image quality and conspicuity of relevant anatomic structures.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and image quality of low-dose CT of the paranasal sinuses using iterative reconstruction with adaptive-iterative dose reduction in three dimensions (AIDR 3D) in comparison with conventional image protocols of older scanner generations. METHODS: Sinus CT scans of 136 patients were assessed retrospectively. Patients underwent CT either with low-dose settings (Protocol A: 80 kV, 30 mA s; Protocol B: 120 kV, 15 mA s or C: 80 kV, 90 mA s) reconstructed using AIDR 3D (Protocols A and B) or filtered back projection (FBP) (Protocol C) or with standard dose (Protocol D: 120 kV, 80 mA s) and FBP. Image quality was assessed in consensus by two blinded readers scoring the diagnostic image quality (from 1 = excellent to 5 = non-diagnostic) and conspicuity of important anatomic landmarks (from 0 = not visible to 2 = completely visible; maximum score of 16 points) as well as osseous structures (maximum score of 12 points). Dose-length product, effective dose (ED), CT dose index and scan length were retrieved for each scan and compared. RESULTS: Mean ED could be lowered by 82% when using Protocol A. The best image quality was found using Protocol B (mean score = 2.1 ± 0.51). Conspicuity of relevant anatomic landmarks was best with Protocol A (mean score = 11.97 ± 1.88). Protocol B provided the highest conspicuity of osseous structures (mean score = 8.27 ± 1.58). Image noise was highest in images obtained using Protocol A. CONCLUSIONS: AIDR 3D allows a significant dose reduction while maintaining a good diagnostic image quality and conspicuity of relevant anatomic structures.
Entities:
Keywords:
computed tomography; dose reduction; head and neck; iterative reconstruction; low dose; paranasal sinus
Authors: Lucas L Geyer; U Joseph Schoepf; Felix G Meinel; John W Nance; Gorka Bastarrika; Jonathon A Leipsic; Narinder S Paul; Marco Rengo; Andrea Laghi; Carlo N De Cecco Journal: Radiology Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: B Schulz; M Beeres; B Bodelle; R Bauer; F Al-Butmeh; A Thalhammer; T J Vogl; J M Kerl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 3.825