Amisha Shah1, Mitchell Rees2, Erica Kar2, Kimberly Bolton2, Vincent Lee2, Ashok Panigrahy2. 1. Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA. shaha3@upmc.edu. 2. Department of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh of UPMC, 4401 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA, 15224, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For the past several years, increased levels of imaging radiation and cumulative radiation to children has been a significant concern. Although several measures have been taken to reduce radiation dose during computed tomography (CT) scan, the newer dose reduction software adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) has been an effective technique in reducing radiation dose. To our knowledge, no studies are published that assess the effect of ASIR on extremity CT scans in children. OBJECTIVE: To compare radiation dose, image noise, and subjective image quality in pediatric lower extremity CT scans acquired with and without ASIR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 53 patients imaged on a CT scanner equipped with ASIR software. The control group consisted of 37 patients whose CT images were acquired without ASIR. Image noise, Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDI) and dose length product (DLP) were measured. Two pediatric radiologists rated the studies in subjective categories: image sharpness, noise, diagnostic acceptability, and artifacts. RESULTS: The CTDI (p value = 0.0184) and DLP (p value <0.0002) were significantly decreased with the use of ASIR compared with non-ASIR studies. However, the subjective ratings for sharpness (p < 0.0001) and diagnostic acceptability of the ASIR images (p < 0.0128) were decreased compared with standard, non-ASIR CT studies. CONCLUSION: Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction reduces radiation dose for lower extremity CTs in children, but at the expense of diagnostic imaging quality. Further studies are warranted to determine the specific utility of ASIR for pediatric musculoskeletal CT imaging.
BACKGROUND: For the past several years, increased levels of imaging radiation and cumulative radiation to children has been a significant concern. Although several measures have been taken to reduce radiation dose during computed tomography (CT) scan, the newer dose reduction software adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) has been an effective technique in reducing radiation dose. To our knowledge, no studies are published that assess the effect of ASIR on extremity CT scans in children. OBJECTIVE: To compare radiation dose, image noise, and subjective image quality in pediatric lower extremity CT scans acquired with and without ASIR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study group consisted of 53 patients imaged on a CT scanner equipped with ASIR software. The control group consisted of 37 patients whose CT images were acquired without ASIR. Image noise, Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDI) and dose length product (DLP) were measured. Two pediatric radiologists rated the studies in subjective categories: image sharpness, noise, diagnostic acceptability, and artifacts. RESULTS: The CTDI (p value = 0.0184) and DLP (p value <0.0002) were significantly decreased with the use of ASIR compared with non-ASIR studies. However, the subjective ratings for sharpness (p < 0.0001) and diagnostic acceptability of the ASIR images (p < 0.0128) were decreased compared with standard, non-ASIR CT studies. CONCLUSION: Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction reduces radiation dose for lower extremity CTs in children, but at the expense of diagnostic imaging quality. Further studies are warranted to determine the specific utility of ASIR for pediatric musculoskeletal CT imaging.
Authors: Martha S Linet; Thomas L Slovis; Donald L Miller; Ruth Kleinerman; Choonsik Lee; Preetha Rajaraman; Amy Berrington de Gonzalez Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2012-02-03 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Yoshiko Sagara; Amy K Hara; William Pavlicek; Alvin C Silva; Robert G Paden; Qing Wu Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Sean Tenant; Chun Lap Pang; Prageeth Dissanayake; Varut Vardhanabhuti; Colin Stuckey; Catherine Gutteridge; Christopher Hyde; Carl Roobottom Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2017-03-13 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Gregory A Vorona; Rafael C Ceschin; Barbara L Clayton; Tom Sutcavage; Sameh S Tadros; Ashok Panigrahy Journal: Pediatr Radiol Date: 2011-05-19
Authors: Sarabjeet Singh; Mannudeep K Kalra; Michael A Moore; Randheer Shailam; Bob Liu; Thomas L Toth; Ellen Grant; Sjirk J Westra Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-05-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Aaron Sodickson; Pieter F Baeyens; Katherine P Andriole; Luciano M Prevedello; Richard D Nawfel; Richard Hanson; Ramin Khorasani Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Kelsey B Mathieu; Hua Ai; Patricia S Fox; Myrna Cobos Barco Godoy; Reginald F Munden; Patricia M de Groot; Tinsu Pan Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 2.102