BACKGROUND: To reduce the radiation exposure from chest computed tomography (CT), ultralow-dose CT (ULDCT) protocols performed at sub-millisievert levels were previously tested for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules (PNs). The purpose of our study was to investigate the effect of ULDCT and iterative image reconstruction on volumetric measurements of solid PNs. METHODS: CT datasets of an anthropomorphic chest phantom containing solid microspheres were obtained with a third-generation dual-source CT at standard dose, 1/8th, 1/20th and 1/70th of standard dose [CT volume dose index (CTDIvol): 0.03-2.03 mGy]. Semi-automated volumetric measurements were performed on CT datasets reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and advanced modelled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE), at strength level 3 and 5. Absolute percentage error (APE) evaluated measurement accuracy related to the effective volume. Scan repetition differences were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) assessed influence of different scan parameters on APE. Proportional differences (PDs) tested the effect of dose settings and reconstruction algorithms on volumetric measurements, as compared to the standard protocol (standard dose-FBP). RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis revealed small mean interscan differences of APE with narrow limits of agreement (-0.1%±4.3% to -0.3%±3.8%). Dose settings (P<0.001), reconstruction algorithms (P<0.001), nodule diameters (P<0.001) and nodule density (P=0.011) had statistically significant influence on APE. Post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed slightly higher APE when scanning with 1/70th of standard dose [mean difference: 3.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5-4.3%; P<0.001], and for image reconstruction with ADMIRE5 (mean difference: 1.8%, 95% CI: 1.0-2.5%; P<0.001). No significant differences for scanning with 1/20th of standard dose (P=0.42), and image reconstruction with ADMIRE3 (P=0.19) were found. Scanning with 1/70th of standard dose and image reconstruction with FBP showed the widest range of PDs (-16.8% to 23.4%) compared to standard dose-FBP. CONCLUSIONS: Our phantom study showed no significant difference between nodule volume measurements on standard dose CT (CTDIvol: 2 mGy) and ULDCT with 1/20th of standard dose (CTDIvol: 0.10 mGy).
BACKGROUND: To reduce the radiation exposure from chest computed tomography (CT), ultralow-dose CT (ULDCT) protocols performed at sub-millisievert levels were previously tested for the evaluation of pulmonary nodules (PNs). The purpose of our study was to investigate the effect of ULDCT and iterative image reconstruction on volumetric measurements of solid PNs. METHODS: CT datasets of an anthropomorphic chest phantom containing solid microspheres were obtained with a third-generation dual-source CT at standard dose, 1/8th, 1/20th and 1/70th of standard dose [CT volume dose index (CTDIvol): 0.03-2.03 mGy]. Semi-automated volumetric measurements were performed on CT datasets reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and advanced modelled iterative reconstruction (ADMIRE), at strength level 3 and 5. Absolute percentage error (APE) evaluated measurement accuracy related to the effective volume. Scan repetition differences were evaluated using Bland-Altman analysis. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) assessed influence of different scan parameters on APE. Proportional differences (PDs) tested the effect of dose settings and reconstruction algorithms on volumetric measurements, as compared to the standard protocol (standard dose-FBP). RESULTS: Bland-Altman analysis revealed small mean interscan differences of APE with narrow limits of agreement (-0.1%±4.3% to -0.3%±3.8%). Dose settings (P<0.001), reconstruction algorithms (P<0.001), nodule diameters (P<0.001) and nodule density (P=0.011) had statistically significant influence on APE. Post-hoc Bonferroni tests showed slightly higher APE when scanning with 1/70th of standard dose [mean difference: 3.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5-4.3%; P<0.001], and for image reconstruction with ADMIRE5 (mean difference: 1.8%, 95% CI: 1.0-2.5%; P<0.001). No significant differences for scanning with 1/20th of standard dose (P=0.42), and image reconstruction with ADMIRE3 (P=0.19) were found. Scanning with 1/70th of standard dose and image reconstruction with FBP showed the widest range of PDs (-16.8% to 23.4%) compared to standard dose-FBP. CONCLUSIONS: Our phantom study showed no significant difference between nodule volume measurements on standard dose CT (CTDIvol: 2 mGy) and ULDCT with 1/20th of standard dose (CTDIvol: 0.10 mGy).
Authors: Priyanka Prakash; Mannudeep K Kalra; Jeanne B Ackman; Subba R Digumarthy; Jiang Hsieh; Synho Do; Jo-Anne O Shepard; Matthew D Gilman Journal: Radiology Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jin Mo Goo; Trongtum Tongdee; Ranista Tongdee; Kwangjae Yeo; Charles F Hildebolt; Kyongtae T Bae Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Marco Das; Julia Ley-Zaporozhan; H A Gietema; Andre Czech; Georg Mühlenbruch; Andreas H Mahnken; Markus Katoh; Annemarie Bakai; Marcos Salganicoff; Stefan Diederich; Mathias Prokop; Hans-Ulrich Kauczor; Rolf W Günther; Joachim E Wildberger Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-01-06 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Rob J van Klaveren; Matthijs Oudkerk; Mathias Prokop; Ernst T Scholten; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Rene Vernhout; Carola A van Iersel; Karien A M van den Bergh; Susan van 't Westeinde; Carlijn van der Aalst; Erik Thunnissen; Dong Ming Xu; Ying Wang; Yingru Zhao; Hester A Gietema; Bart-Jan de Hoop; Harry J M Groen; Geertruida H de Bock; Peter van Ooijen; Carla Weenink; Johny Verschakelen; Jan-Willem J Lammers; Wim Timens; Dik Willebrand; Aryan Vink; Willem Mali; Harry J de Koning Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-12-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Matthias May; Rafael Heiss; Julia Koehnen; Matthias Wetzl; Marco Wiesmueller; Christoph Treutlein; Lars Braeuer; Michael Uder; Markus Kopp Journal: Invest Radiol Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 6.016