• Radiology · Nov 2010

    Comparative Study

    Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques.

    • Sarabjeet Singh, Mannudeep K Kalra, Jiang Hsieh, Paul E Licato, Synho Do, Homer H Pien, and Michael A Blake.
    • Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 25 New Chardon St, Suite 400B, Boston, MA 02114, USA. ssingh6@partners.org
    • Radiology. 2010 Nov 1; 257 (2): 373-83.

    PurposeTo compare image quality and lesion conspicuity on abdominal computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with different x-ray tube current-time products (50-200 mAs) and reconstructed with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and filtered back projection (FBP) techniques.Materials And MethodsTwenty-two patients (mean age, 60.1 years ± 7.3 [standard deviation]; age range, 52.8-67.4 years; mean weight, 78.9 kg ± 18.3; 12 men, 10 women) gave informed consent for this prospective institutional review board-approved and HIPAA-compliant study, which involved the acquisition of four additional image series at multidetector CT. Images were acquired at different tube current-time products (200, 150, 100, and 50 mAs) and encompassed an abdominal lesion over a 10-cm scan length. Images were reconstructed separately with FBP and with three levels of ASIR-FBP blending. Two radiologists reviewed FBP and ASIR images for image quality in a blinded and randomized manner. Volume CT dose index (CTDI(vol)), dose-length product, patient weight, objective noise, and CT numbers were recorded. Data were analyzed by using analysis of variance and the Wilcoxon signed rank test.ResultsCTDI(vol) values were 16.8, 12.6, 8.4, and 4.2 mGy for 200, 150, 100, and 50 mAs, respectively (P < .001). Subjective noise was graded as below average at 150 mAs and average at 100 and 50 mAs for ASIR images, as compared with FBP images, on which noise was graded as average at 150 mAs, above average at 100 mAs, and unacceptable at 50 mAs. A substantial blotchy image appearance was noted in four of 22 image series acquired at 4.2 mGy with 70% ASIR. Lesion conspicuity was significantly better at 4.2 mGy on ASIR than on FBP images (observed P < .044), and overall diagnostic confidence changed from unacceptable on FBP to acceptable on ASIR images.ConclusionASIR lowers noise and improves diagnostic confidence in and conspicuity of subtle abdominal lesions at 8.4 mGy when images are reconstructed with 30% ASIR blending and at 4.2 mGy in patients weighing 90 kg or less when images are reconstructed with 50% or 70% ASIR blending.© RSNA, 2010.

      Pubmed     Free 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…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.