Contrast-to-noise ratio and low-contrast object resolution on full- and low-dose MDCT: Safire versus filtered back projection in a low-contrast object phantom and in the liver

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 199, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 8-18

  Baker, Mark E ^a   Dong, Frank ^a   Primak, Andrew ^b   Obuchowski, Nancy A ^a   Einstein, David ^a   Gandhi, Namita ^a   Herts, Brian R ^a   Purysko, Andrei ^a   Remer, Erick ^a   Vachani, Neil ^a  

^a LERNER RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b SIEMENS CORPORATE RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Contrast to noise ratio; Iterative reconstruction; Liver; Low contrast object detection; MDCT

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST OBJECT RESOLUTION; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; FEMALE; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION; HUMAN; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INFERIOR CAVA VEIN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIVER; MALE; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NOISE REDUCTION; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION ATTENUATION; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SINOGRAM AFFIRMED ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; FEMALE; HUMANS; LIVER; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; VENA CAVA, INFERIOR;

EID: 84863693251     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.11.7421     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:2277-2284 (Pubitemid 350190758)
2. Berrington de González A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:2071-2077
3. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:2078-2086
4. Redberg RF. Cancer risks and radiation exposure from computed tomographic scans: how can we be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks? Arch Intern Med 2009; 169:2049-2050
5. Amis ES Jr, Butler PF, Applegate KE, et al. American College of Radiology white paper on radiation dose in medicine. J Am Coll Radiol 2007; 4:272-284 (Pubitemid 46671375)
6. Larson DB, Johnson LW, Schnell BM, Goske MJ, Salisbury SR, Forman HP. Rising use of CT in child visits to the emergency department in the United States, 1995-2008. Radiology 2011; 259:793-801
7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. Report no. 160. Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection, 2009
8. International Atomic Energy Agency. Dose reduction in CT while maintaining diagnostic confidence: a feasibility/demonstration study. IAEA TECDOC-1621. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2009
9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. White paper: initiative to reduce unnecessary radiation exposure from medical imaging. U.S. Food and Drug Administration Website. www.fda.gov/Radiation-Emitting-Products/RadiationSafety/ RadiationDoseReduction/ucm199994.htm. Published February 2010. Updated December 14, 2010. Accessed March 6, 2012
10. Linton O, Tendforde TS, Amis ES, Sierzenski P. Summary of workshop on CT in emergency medicine: ensuring appropriate use. J Am Coll Radiol 2011; 8:325-329
11. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L, Christner J. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin N Am 2009; 47:27-40
12. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Yoshizumi T, et al. Effect of automatic tube current modulation on radiation dose and image quality for low tube voltage multidetector row CT angiography: phantom study. Acad Radiol 2009; 16:997-1002
13. Yu L, Li H, Fletcher JG, McCollough CH. Automatic selection of tube potential for radiation dose reduction in CT: a general strategy. Med Phys 2010; 37:234-243
14. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR 2009; 193:764-771
15. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Kambadakone AK, et al. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 2010; 45:202-210
16. Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, et al. Comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR 2010; 195:713-719
17. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010; 257:373-383
18. Lee TY, Chhem RK. Impact of new technologies on dose reduction in CT. Eur J Radiol 2010; 76:28-35
19. Leipsic J, Nguyen G, Brown J, Sin D, Mayo JR. A prospective evaluation of dose reduction and image quality in chest CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJR 2010; 195:1095-1099
20. Kambadakone AR, Prakash P, Hahn PF, Sahani DV, Low-Dose CT. Examinations in Crohn's disease: impact on image quality, diagnostic performance and radiation dose. AJR 2010; 195:78-88
21. Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, et al. Low-tube-voltage, high-tube-current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm - initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010; 254:145-153
22. Guimarães LS, Fletcher JG, Harmsen WS, et al. Appropriate patient selection at abdominal dual-energy CT using 80 kV: relationship between patient size, image noise, and image quality. Radiology 2010; 257:732-742
23. Leipsic J, LaBounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary CT angiography. AJR 2010; 195:649-654
24. Leipsic J, LaBounty TM, Heilbron B, et al. Estimated radiation dose reduction using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: the ERASIR study. AJR 2010; 195:655-660
25. White CS. Radiation redux for coronary CT angiography: how low can we go? AJR 2010; 195:647-648
26. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, Wu Q, Peter MB, Johnson CD. Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. AJR 2010; 195:126-131
27. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Ackman JB, et al. Diffuse lung disease: CT of the chest with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Radiology 2010; 256:261-269
28. Silva AC, Lawder HJ, Hara A, Kujak J, Pavlicek W. Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. AJR 2010; 194:191-199
29. Pontana F, Pagniez J, Flohr T, et al. Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection. Part I. Evaluation of image noise reduction in 32 patients. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:627-635
30. Pontana F, Duhamel A, Pagniez J, Flohr T, Faivre JB, Hachulla AL. Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection. Part 2. Image quality of low-dose CT examinations in 80 patients. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:636-643
31. May MS, Wust W, Brand M, et al. Dose reduction in abdominal computed tomography: intraindividual comparison of image quality of full-dose standard and half-dose iterative reconstruction with dual-source computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2011; 46:465-470
32. Schindera ST, Diedrichsen L, Muller HC, et al. Iterative reconstruction algorithm for abdominal multidetector CT at different tube voltages: assessment of diagnostic accuracy, image quality and radiation dose in a phantom study. Radiology 2011; 260:454-462
33. Ghetti C, Ortenzia O, Serreli G. CT iterative reconstruction in image space: a phantom study. Phys Med 2011 [Epub ahead of print]
34. Moscariello A, Takx RA, Schoepf UJ, et al. Coronary CT angiography: image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction using a novel iterative image reconstruction technique - comparison with traditional filtered back projection. Eur Radiol 2011; 21:2130-2138
35. Jaffe TA, Gaca AM, Delaney S, et al. Radiation doses from small-bowel follow-through and abdominopelvic MDCT in Crohn's disease. AJR 2007; 189:1015-1022 (Pubitemid 350032983)
36. Leng S, Yu L, McCollough CH. Radiation dose reduction at CT enterography: how low can we go while preserving diagnostic accuracy? AJR 2010; 195:76-77
37. Rose A. Vision: human and electronic (optical physics and engineering). New York, NY: Springer-Verlag, 1974
38. Goodenough DJ, Weaver KE. Factors related to low contrast resolution in CT scanners. Comput Radiol 1984; 8:297-308 (Pubitemid 15218152)
39. Seltzer SE, Swensson RG, Nawfel RD, Lentini JF, Kazda I, Judy PF. Visualization and detection-localization on computed tomographic images. Invest Radiol 1991; 26:285-294
40. Kanal KM, Chung JH, Wang J, et al. Image noise and liver lesion detection with MDCT: a phantom study. AJR 2011; 197:437-441
41. Barrett HH, Swindell W. Radiological imaging: the theory of image formation, detection and processing. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1996
42. Puetter RC, Gosnell TR, Yahil A. Digital image reconstruction: deblurring and denoising. Annu Rev Astron Astrophys 2005; 43:139-194 (Pubitemid 41454484)
43. Buades A, Coll B, Morel JM. A review of image denoising algorithms, with a new one. Multisc Model Simul 2005; 4:490-530 (Pubitemid 43890582)
44. Hanson KM. Detectability in the presence of computed tomographic reconstruction noise. Proc SPIE 1977; 127:304-312
45. Chao EH, Toth TL, Bromberg NB, Williams EC, Fox SH, Carleton DA. A statistical method of defining low contrast detectability. Medicine 2000; 217:262
46. Smith SW. Special imaging techniques, chapter 25. In: Smith SW, ed. The scientist and engineer's guide to digital signal processing. San Diego, CA: California Technical Publishing, 1997:423-450
47. Meaney TF, Raudkivi U, McIntyre WJ, et al. Detection of low-contrast lesions in computed body tomography: an experimental study of simulated lesions. Radiology 1980; 134:149-154 (Pubitemid 10217923)
48. Hasegawa BH, Cacak RK, Mulvaney JA, Hendee WR. Problems with contrast-detail curves for CT performance evaluation. AJR 1982; 138:135-138 (Pubitemid 12196407)
49. Judy PF, Swensson RG, Nawfel RD, Chan KH, Seltzer SE. Contrast-detail curves for liver CT. Med Phys 1992; 19:1167-1174