File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi

TitleComparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi
Authors
Issue Date2013
Citation
Insights into Imaging, 2013, v. 4 n. 5, p. 661-669 How to Cite?
AbstractObjectives: To compare image quality on computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques in CT kidney/ureter/bladder (KUB) examination. Methods: Eighteen patients underwent standard protocol CT KUB at our institution. The same raw data were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Objective [mean image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for kidney and mean attenuation values of subcutaneous fat] and subjective image parameters (image noise, image contrast, overall visibility of kidneys/ureters/bladder, visibility of small structures, and overall diagnostic confidence) were assessed using a scoring system from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Results: Objective image measurements revealed significantly less image noise and higher CNR and the same fat attenuation values for the MBIR technique (P < 0.05). MBIR scored best in all the subjective image parameters (P < 0.001) with averages ranging between 2.05-2.73 for MBIR, 2.95-3.10 for ASIR and 3.08-3.31 for FBP. No significant difference was observed between FBP and ASIR (P > 0.05), while there was a significant difference between ASIR vs. MBIR (P < 0.05). The mean effective dose was 3 mSv. Conclusion: MBIR shows superior reduction in noise and improved image quality (both objective and subjective analysis) compared with ASIR and FBP CT KUB examinations. Main Messages: • There are many reconstruction options in CT. • Novel model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) showed the least noise and optimal image quality. • For CT of the kidneys/ureters/bladder, MBIR should be utilised, if available. • Further studies to reduce the dose while maintaining image quality should be pursued. © 2013 The Author(s).
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197957
ISSN
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.004

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVardhanabhuti, V-
dc.contributor.authorIlyas, S-
dc.contributor.authorGutteridge, C-
dc.contributor.authorFreeman, SJ-
dc.contributor.authorRoobottom, CA-
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-16T03:40:04Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-16T03:40:04Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationInsights into Imaging, 2013, v. 4 n. 5, p. 661-669-
dc.identifier.issn1869-4101-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197957-
dc.description.abstractObjectives: To compare image quality on computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques in CT kidney/ureter/bladder (KUB) examination. Methods: Eighteen patients underwent standard protocol CT KUB at our institution. The same raw data were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Objective [mean image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for kidney and mean attenuation values of subcutaneous fat] and subjective image parameters (image noise, image contrast, overall visibility of kidneys/ureters/bladder, visibility of small structures, and overall diagnostic confidence) were assessed using a scoring system from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Results: Objective image measurements revealed significantly less image noise and higher CNR and the same fat attenuation values for the MBIR technique (P < 0.05). MBIR scored best in all the subjective image parameters (P < 0.001) with averages ranging between 2.05-2.73 for MBIR, 2.95-3.10 for ASIR and 3.08-3.31 for FBP. No significant difference was observed between FBP and ASIR (P > 0.05), while there was a significant difference between ASIR vs. MBIR (P < 0.05). The mean effective dose was 3 mSv. Conclusion: MBIR shows superior reduction in noise and improved image quality (both objective and subjective analysis) compared with ASIR and FBP CT KUB examinations. Main Messages: • There are many reconstruction options in CT. • Novel model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) showed the least noise and optimal image quality. • For CT of the kidneys/ureters/bladder, MBIR should be utilised, if available. • Further studies to reduce the dose while maintaining image quality should be pursued. © 2013 The Author(s).-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofInsights into Imaging-
dc.titleComparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s13244-013-0273-5-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84884559428-
dc.identifier.volume4-
dc.identifier.issue5-
dc.identifier.spage661-
dc.identifier.epage669-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats