• Academic radiology · Jun 2014

    Ultra-low-dose CT of the lung: effect of iterative reconstruction techniques on image quality.

    • Masahiro Yanagawa, Tomoko Gyobu, Ann N Leung, Misa Kawai, Yutaka Kawata, Hiromitsu Sumikawa, Osamu Honda, and Noriyuki Tomiyama.
    • Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, 1201 Welch Rd, Stanford, CA 94305; Department of Radiology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan. Electronic address: masayana@stanford.edu.
    • Acad Radiol. 2014 Jun 1; 21 (6): 695-703.

    Rationale And ObjectivesTo compare quality of ultra-low-dose thin-section computed tomography (CT) images of the lung reconstructed using model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) and adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) to filtered back projection (FBP) and to determine the minimum tube current-time product on MBIR images by comparing to standard-dose FBP images.Materials And MethodsTen cadaveric lungs were scanned using 120 kVp and four different tube current-time products (8, 16, 32, and 80 mAs). Thin-section images were reconstructed using MBIR, three ASIR blends (30%, 60%, and 90%), and FBP. Using the 8-mAs data, side-to-side comparison of the four iterative reconstruction image sets to FBP was performed by two independent observers who evaluated normal and abnormal findings, subjective image noise, streak artifact, and overall image quality. Image noise was also measured quantitatively. Subsequently, 8-, 16-, and 32-mAs MBIR images were compared to standard-dose FBP images. Comparisons of image sets were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test with Bonferroni correction.ResultsAt 8 mAs, MBIR images were significantly better (P < .005) than other reconstruction techniques except in evaluation of interlobular septal thickening. Each set of low-dose MBIR images had significantly lower (P < .001) subjective and objective noise and streak artifacts than standard-dose FBP images. Conspicuity and visibility of normal and abnormal findings were not significantly different between 16-mAs MBIR and 80-mAs FBP images except in identification of intralobular reticular opacities.ConclusionsMBIR imaging shows higher overall quality with lower noise and streak artifacts than ASIR or FBP imaging, resulting in nearly 80% dose reduction without any degradations of overall image quality.Copyright © 2014 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…