File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Image comparative assessment using iterative reconstructions: Clinical comparison of low-dose abdominal/pelvic computed tomography between adaptive statistical, model-based iterative reconstructions and traditional filtered back projection in 65 patients

TitleImage comparative assessment using iterative reconstructions: Clinical comparison of low-dose abdominal/pelvic computed tomography between adaptive statistical, model-based iterative reconstructions and traditional filtered back projection in 65 patients
Authors
Issue Date2014
Citation
Investigative Radiology, 2014, v. 49 n. 4, p. 209-216 How to Cite?
AbstractOBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare image quality (objective and subjective parameters) and confidence in lesion detection between 3 image reconstruction algorithms in computed tomographic (CT) examinations of the abdomen/pelvis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective institutional review board-approved study included 65 patients (mean [SD] age, 71.3 ± 9 years; mean [SD] body mass index, 24.4 [4.8] kg) who underwent routine CT examinations of the abdomen/pelvis followed immediately by 2 low-dose scans. Raw data sets were reconstructed by using filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and a model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). Measurements of objective noise and CT numbers were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance. Six subjective image quality parameters were scored. Diagnostic confidence and accuracy in detection of various elementary lesions were performed. RESULTS: Objectively, mean image noise for MBIR was significantly superior at all dose levels (P < 0.001). Subjectively, standard-dose ASIR and low-dose MBIR scans were better than standard-dose FBP scan in all parameters assessed (P < 0.05). Low-dose MBIR scans were comparable with standard-dose ASIR scans in all parameters except at noise index of 70 (approximately 85% dose reduction), where, in this case, the detection of liver lesions less than 5 mm were rated inferior (P < 0.05) with diagnostic accuracy reducing to 77.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose MBIR scan shows superior objective noise reduction compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. Subjectively, low-dose MBIR scans at 76% dose reduction were also superior compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. However, at dose reductions of 85%, small liver lesions may be missed. Copyright © 2014 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197958
ISSN
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVardhanabhuti, V-
dc.contributor.authorRiordan, RD-
dc.contributor.authorMitchell, GR-
dc.contributor.authorHyde, C-
dc.contributor.authorRoobottom, CA-
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-16T03:40:04Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-16T03:40:04Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.citationInvestigative Radiology, 2014, v. 49 n. 4, p. 209-216-
dc.identifier.issn1536-0210-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/197958-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare image quality (objective and subjective parameters) and confidence in lesion detection between 3 image reconstruction algorithms in computed tomographic (CT) examinations of the abdomen/pelvis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective institutional review board-approved study included 65 patients (mean [SD] age, 71.3 ± 9 years; mean [SD] body mass index, 24.4 [4.8] kg) who underwent routine CT examinations of the abdomen/pelvis followed immediately by 2 low-dose scans. Raw data sets were reconstructed by using filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and a model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). Measurements of objective noise and CT numbers were compared using repeated-measures analysis of variance. Six subjective image quality parameters were scored. Diagnostic confidence and accuracy in detection of various elementary lesions were performed. RESULTS: Objectively, mean image noise for MBIR was significantly superior at all dose levels (P < 0.001). Subjectively, standard-dose ASIR and low-dose MBIR scans were better than standard-dose FBP scan in all parameters assessed (P < 0.05). Low-dose MBIR scans were comparable with standard-dose ASIR scans in all parameters except at noise index of 70 (approximately 85% dose reduction), where, in this case, the detection of liver lesions less than 5 mm were rated inferior (P < 0.05) with diagnostic accuracy reducing to 77.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose MBIR scan shows superior objective noise reduction compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. Subjectively, low-dose MBIR scans at 76% dose reduction were also superior compared with standard-dose FBP and ASIR. However, at dose reductions of 85%, small liver lesions may be missed. Copyright © 2014 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofInvestigative Radiology-
dc.titleImage comparative assessment using iterative reconstructions: Clinical comparison of low-dose abdominal/pelvic computed tomography between adaptive statistical, model-based iterative reconstructions and traditional filtered back projection in 65 patients-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/RLI.0000000000000017-
dc.identifier.pmid24368613-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84896317459-
dc.identifier.volume49-
dc.identifier.issue4-
dc.identifier.spage209-
dc.identifier.epage216-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000332884400004-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats