Bastien Pauchard1, Kai Higashigaito2, Aicha Lamri-Senouci1, Jean-Francois Knebel3, Dominik Berthold4, Francis Robert Verdun5, Hatem Alkadhi2, Sabine Schmidt6. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Lausanne, University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 3. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Lausanne, University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland; EEG Brain Mapping Core, Centre for Biomedical Imaging (CIBM), Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Lausanne, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 5. Institute of Radiation Physics, University Hospital Lausanne, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 6. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Lausanne, University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: sabine.schmidt@chuv.ch.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) algorithms for reduced-dose computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four young oncology patients (mean age 30 ± 9 years) were included. After routine thoraco-abdominal CT (dose 100%, average CTDIvol 9.1 ± 2.4 mGy, range 4.4-16.9 mGy), follow-up CT was acquired at 50% (average CTDIvol 4.5 ± 1.2 mGy, range 2.2-8.4 mGy) in 29 patients additionally at 20% dose (average CTDIvol 1.9 ± 0.5 mGy, range 0.9-3.4 mGy). Each reduced-dose CT was reconstructed using both ASIR and MBIR. Four radiologists (two juniors and two seniors) blinded to dose and technique read each set of CT images regarding objective and subjective image qualities (high- or low-contrast structures), subjective noise or pixilated appearance, diagnostic confidence, and lesion detection. RESULTS: At all dose levels, objective image noise was significantly lower with MBIR than with ASIR (P < 0.001). The subjective image quality for low-contrast structures was significantly higher with MBIR than with ASIR (P < 0.001). Reduced-dose abdominal CT images of patients with higher body mass index (BMI) were read with significantly higher diagnostic confidence than images of slimmer patients (P < 0.001) and had higher subjective image quality, regardless of technique. Although MBIR images appeared significantly more pixilated than ASIR images, they were read with higher diagnostic confidence, especially by juniors (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-dose CT during the follow-up of young oncology patients should be reconstructed with MBIR to ensure diagnostic quality. Elevated body mass index does not hamper the quality of reduced-dose CT.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) algorithms for reduced-dose computed tomography (CT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four young oncology patients (mean age 30 ± 9 years) were included. After routine thoraco-abdominal CT (dose 100%, average CTDIvol 9.1 ± 2.4 mGy, range 4.4-16.9 mGy), follow-up CT was acquired at 50% (average CTDIvol 4.5 ± 1.2 mGy, range 2.2-8.4 mGy) in 29 patients additionally at 20% dose (average CTDIvol 1.9 ± 0.5 mGy, range 0.9-3.4 mGy). Each reduced-dose CT was reconstructed using both ASIR and MBIR. Four radiologists (two juniors and two seniors) blinded to dose and technique read each set of CT images regarding objective and subjective image qualities (high- or low-contrast structures), subjective noise or pixilated appearance, diagnostic confidence, and lesion detection. RESULTS: At all dose levels, objective image noise was significantly lower with MBIR than with ASIR (P < 0.001). The subjective image quality for low-contrast structures was significantly higher with MBIR than with ASIR (P < 0.001). Reduced-dose abdominal CT images of patients with higher body mass index (BMI) were read with significantly higher diagnostic confidence than images of slimmer patients (P < 0.001) and had higher subjective image quality, regardless of technique. Although MBIR images appeared significantly more pixilated than ASIR images, they were read with higher diagnostic confidence, especially by juniors (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced-dose CT during the follow-up of young oncology patients should be reconstructed with MBIR to ensure diagnostic quality. Elevated body mass index does not hamper the quality of reduced-dose CT.
Authors: Ji Eun Lee; Seo-Youn Choi; Jeong Ah Hwang; Sanghyeok Lim; Min Hee Lee; Boem Ha Yi; Jang Gyu Cha Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2021-05-14 Impact factor: 1.889