Feasibility of dose reduction using novel denoising techniques for low kV (80 kV) CT enterography. Optimization and validation

Academic Radiology

Volumn 17, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1203-1210

  Guimarães, Luís S ^a   Fletcher, Joel G ^a   Yu, Lifeng ^a   Huprich, James E ^a   Fidler, Jeff L ^a   Manduca, Armando ^a   Ramirez Giraldo, Juan Carlos ^a   Holmes, David R ^a   McCollough, Cynthia H ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

Bilateral filtering; CT enterography, low energy CT; Image denoising; Image noise; Image quality; Noise reduction; Projection space algorithms; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

IOHEXOL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; VOLUMEN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY ENTEROGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTESTINE WALL; MALE; NOISE REDUCTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGIST;

ADULT; AGED; ALGORITHMS; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTESTINAL DISEASES; INTESTINES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY CONTROL; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77956464589     PISSN: 10766332     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2010.07.001     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Mettler F.A., Thomadsen B.R., Bhargavan M., et al. Medical radiation exposure in the U.S. in 2006: preliminary results. Health Phys 2008, 95:502-507.
2. Berrington de Gonzalez A., Darby S. Risk of cancer from diagnostic X-rays: estimates for the UK and 14 other countries. Lancet 2004, 363:345-351.
3. Nakayama Y., Awai K., Funama Y., et al. Abdominal CT with low tube voltage: preliminary observations about radiation dose, contrast enhancement, image quality, and noise. Radiology 2005, 237:945-951.
4. Szucs-Farkas Z., Verdun F.R., von Allmen G., Mini R.L., Vock P. Effect of X-ray tube parameters, iodine concentration, and patient size on image quality in pulmonary computed tomography angiography: a chest-phantom-study. Invest Radiol 2008, 43:374-381.
5. Bodily K.D., Fletcher J.G., Solem C.A., et al. Crohn disease: mural attenuation and thickness at contrast-enhanced CT enterography-correlation with endoscopic and histologic findings of inflammation. Radiology 2006, 238:505-516.
6. Siegel M.J., Schmidt B., Bradley D., Suess C., Hildebolt C. Radiation dose and image quality in pediatric CT: effect of technical factors and phantom size and shape. Radiology 2004, 233:515-522.
7. Hsieh J. Adaptive streak artifact reduction in computed tomography resulting from excessive x-ray photon noise. Med Phys 1998, 25:2139-2147.
8. Kalra M.K., Maher M.M., Blake M.A., et al. Detection and characterization of lesions on low-radiation-dose abdominal CT images postprocessed with noise reduction filters. Radiology 2004, 232:791-797.
9. Kalra M.K., Maher M.M., Sahani D.V., et al. Low-dose CT of the abdomen: evaluation of image improvement with use of noise reduction filters pilot study. Radiology 2003, 228:251-256.
10. La Riviere P.J., Bian J., Vargas P.A. Penalized-likelihood sinogram restoration for computed tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006, 25:1022-1036.
11. Rizzo S.M., Kalra M.K., Schmidt B., et al. CT images of abdomen and pelvis: effect of nonlinear three-dimensional optimized reconstruction algorithm on image quality and lesion characteristics. Radiology 2005, 237:309-315.
12. Wang J.L.T., Lu H., Liang Z. Penalized weighted least-squares approach to sinogram noise reduction and image reconstruction for low-dose x-ray computed tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006, 25:1272-1283.
13. Manduca A., Yu L., Trzasko J.D., et al. Projection space denoising with bilateral filtering and CT noise modeling for dose reduction in CT. Med Phys 2009, 36:4911-4919.
14. Perona P., Malik J. Scale-space and edge detection using anisotropic diffusion. IEEE Trans Patt Anal Mach Intell 1990, 12:629-639.
15. Anscombe J. The transformation of Poisson, binomial and negative binomial data. Biometrika 1948, 15:246-254.
16. Whiting B.R., Massoumzadeh P., Earl O.A., O'Sullivan J.A., Snyder D.L., Williamson J.F. Properties of preprocessed sinogram data in x-ray computed tomography. Med Phys 2006, 33:3290-3303.
17. Haaga J.R. Radiation dose management: weighing risk versus benefit. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001, 177:289-291.
18. Kalra M.K., Maher M.M., Prasad S.R., et al. Correlation of patient weight and cross-sectional dimensions with subjective image quality at standard dose abdominal CT. Korean J Radiol 2003, 4:234-238.
19. Peloquin J.M., Pardi D.S., Sandborn W.J., et al. Diagnostic ionizing radiation exposure in a population-based cohort of patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Am J Gastroenterol 2008, 103:2015-2022.
20. La Riviere P.J. Penalized-likelihood sinogram smoothing for low-dose CT. Med Phys 2005, 32:1676-1683.
21. Kachelriess M., Watzke O., Kalender W.A. Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral single-slice, multi-slice, and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2001, 28:475-490.
22. Schindera S.T., Nelson R.C., DeLong D.M., et al. Multi-detector row CT of the small bowel: peak enhancement temporal window-initial experience. Radiology 2007, 243:438-444.
23. Yu L., Li H., Fletcher J.G., McCollough C.H. Automatic selection of tube potential for radiation dose reduction in CT: a general strategy. Med Phys 2010, 37:234-243.