Fuminari Tatsugami1, Toru Higaki2, Hiroaki Sakane2, Wataru Fukumoto2, Yoko Kaichi2, Makoto Iida2, Yasutaka Baba2, Masao Kiguchi3, Yasuki Kihara4, So Tsushima5, Kazuo Awai2. 1. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan. Electronic address: sa104@rg8.so-net.ne.jp. 2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Hiroshima University, 1-2-3 Kasumi, Minami-ku, Hiroshima 734-8551, Japan. 3. Department of Radiology, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan. 4. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan. 5. Toshiba Medical Systems Corporation, Tochigi, Japan.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the image quality of coronary artery stent scans on computed tomography images reconstructed with forward projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST) and adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Coronary computed tomography angiography scans of 23 patients with 32 coronary stents were used. The images were reconstructed with AIDR 3D and FIRST. We generated computed tomography attenuation profiles across the stents and measured the width of the edge rise distance and the edge rise slope (ERS). We also calculated the stent lumen attenuation increase ratio (SAIR) and measured visible stent lumen diameters. Two radiologists visually evaluated the image quality of the stents using a 4-point scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the edge rise distance between the two reconstruction methods (P = 0.36). The ERS on FIRST images was greater than the ERS on AIDR 3D images (325.2 HU/mm vs 224.4 HU/mm; P <0.01). The rate of the visible stent lumen diameter compared to the true diameter on FIRST images was higher than that on AIDR 3D images (51.4% vs 47.3%, P <0.01). The SAIR on FIRST images was lower than the SAIR on AIDR 3D images (0.19 vs 0.30, P <0.01). The mean image quality scores for AIDR 3D and FIRST images were 3.18 and 3.63, respectively; the difference was also significant (P <0.01). CONCLUSION: The image quality of coronary artery stent scans is better on FIRST than on AIDR 3D images.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare the image quality of coronary artery stent scans on computed tomography images reconstructed with forward projected model-based iterative reconstruction solution (FIRST) and adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D (AIDR 3D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Coronary computed tomography angiography scans of 23 patients with 32 coronary stents were used. The images were reconstructed with AIDR 3D and FIRST. We generated computed tomography attenuation profiles across the stents and measured the width of the edge rise distance and the edge rise slope (ERS). We also calculated the stent lumen attenuation increase ratio (SAIR) and measured visible stent lumen diameters. Two radiologists visually evaluated the image quality of the stents using a 4-point scale (1 = poor, 4 = excellent). RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the edge rise distance between the two reconstruction methods (P = 0.36). The ERS on FIRST images was greater than the ERS on AIDR 3D images (325.2 HU/mm vs 224.4 HU/mm; P <0.01). The rate of the visible stent lumen diameter compared to the true diameter on FIRST images was higher than that on AIDR 3D images (51.4% vs 47.3%, P <0.01). The SAIR on FIRST images was lower than the SAIR on AIDR 3D images (0.19 vs 0.30, P <0.01). The mean image quality scores for AIDR 3D and FIRST images were 3.18 and 3.63, respectively; the difference was also significant (P <0.01). CONCLUSION: The image quality of coronary artery stent scans is better on FIRST than on AIDR 3D images.