Yongjun Jia1, Bingying Zhai2, Taiping He3, Yong Yu3, Nan Yu3, Haifeng Duan3, Chuangbo Yang3, Xirong Zhang3. 1. Department of Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Shaanxi Chinese Medicine University, No. 2, Weiyang West Road, Xianyang City 712000, Shaanxi Province, China. Electronic address: 404754002@qq.com. 2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Xianyang Hospital of Yan'an University, Xianyang, China. 3. Department of Radiology, Affiliated Hospital of Shaanxi Chinese Medicine University, No. 2, Weiyang West Road, Xianyang City 712000, Shaanxi Province, China.
Abstract
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare upper abdominal computed tomography (CT) image quality of new model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) with low-contrast resolution preference (MBIRNR40), conventional MBIR (MBIRc), and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) at low dose with ASIR at routine-dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study included phantom and 60 patients who had initial and follow-up CT scans. For patients, the delay phase was acquired at routine-dose (noise index = 10 HU) for the initial scan and low dose (noise index = 20 HU) for the follow-up. The low-dose CT was reconstructed with 40% and 60% ASIR, MBIRc, and MBIRNR40, while routine-dose CT was reconstructed with 40% ASIR. CT value and noise measurements of the subcutaneous fat, back muscle, liver, and spleen parenchyma were compared using one-way ANOVA. Two radiologists used semiquantitative 7-scale (-3 to +3) to rate image quality and artifacts. RESULTS: The phantom study revealed superior low-contrast resolution with MBIRNR40. For patient scans, the CT dose index for the low-dose CT was 3.00 ± 1.32 mGy, 75% lower than the 11.90 ± 4.75 mGy for the routine-dose CT. Image noise for the low-dose MBIRNR40 images was significantly lower than the low-dose MBIRc and ASIR images, and routine-dose ASIR images (p < 0.05). Subjective ratings showed higher image quality for low-dose MBIRNR40, with lower noise, better low-contrast resolution for abdominal structures, and finer lesion contours than those of low-dose MBIRc and ASIR images, and routine-dose ASIR images (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: MBIRNR40 with low-contrast resolution preference provides significantly lower noise and better image quality than MBIRc and ASIR in low-dose abdominal CT; significantly better objective and subjective image quality than the routine-dose ASIR with 75% dose reduction.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: To compare upper abdominal computed tomography (CT) image quality of new model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) with low-contrast resolution preference (MBIRNR40), conventional MBIR (MBIRc), and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) at low dose with ASIR at routine-dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study included phantom and 60 patients who had initial and follow-up CT scans. For patients, the delay phase was acquired at routine-dose (noise index = 10 HU) for the initial scan and low dose (noise index = 20 HU) for the follow-up. The low-dose CT was reconstructed with 40% and 60% ASIR, MBIRc, and MBIRNR40, while routine-dose CT was reconstructed with 40% ASIR. CT value and noise measurements of the subcutaneous fat, back muscle, liver, and spleen parenchyma were compared using one-way ANOVA. Two radiologists used semiquantitative 7-scale (-3 to +3) to rate image quality and artifacts. RESULTS: The phantom study revealed superior low-contrast resolution with MBIRNR40. For patient scans, the CT dose index for the low-dose CT was 3.00 ± 1.32 mGy, 75% lower than the 11.90 ± 4.75 mGy for the routine-dose CT. Image noise for the low-dose MBIRNR40 images was significantly lower than the low-dose MBIRc and ASIR images, and routine-dose ASIR images (p < 0.05). Subjective ratings showed higher image quality for low-dose MBIRNR40, with lower noise, better low-contrast resolution for abdominal structures, and finer lesion contours than those of low-dose MBIRc and ASIR images, and routine-dose ASIR images (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: MBIRNR40 with low-contrast resolution preference provides significantly lower noise and better image quality than MBIRc and ASIR in low-dose abdominal CT; significantly better objective and subjective image quality than the routine-dose ASIR with 75% dose reduction.