Achieving routine submillisievert CT scanning: Report from the Summit on Management of Radiation Dose in CT

Radiology

Volumn 264, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 567-580

  McCollough, Cynthia H ^a   Chen, Guang Hong ^b   Kalender, Willi ^c   Leng, Shuai ^a   Samei, Ehsan ^d   Taguchi, Katsuyuki ^e   Wang, Ge ^f   Yu, Lifeng ^a   Pettigrew, Roderic I ^g  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AND PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ERLANGEN NUREMBERG   (Germany)

^d DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^e DEPARTMENT OF PATHOLOGY   (United States)

^f VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CALIBRATION; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NOISE REDUCTION; PATIENT CARE; PHOTON; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DETECTOR; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 84864373822     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.12112265     Document Type: Article

References (98)

1. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP report no. 26). Oxford, England: International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1977.
2. McCollough CH, Schueler BA. Calculation of effective dose. Med Phys 2000;27(5):828-837. (Pubitemid 30349990)
3. 1990 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Ann ICRP 1991;21(1-3):1-201.
4. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37(2-4):1-332.
5. Menzel HG, Clement C, DeLuca P. ICRP publication 110. Realistic reference phantoms: an ICRP/ICRU joint effort. A report of adult reference computational phantoms. Ann ICRP 2009;39(2):1-164. [Published correction appears in Ann ICRP 2009;39(2):165.]
6. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. The measurement, reporting and management of radiation dose in CT. AAPM Task Group 23 of the Diagnostic Imaging Council CT Committee. College Park, Md: American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 2008.
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 and Measurements, 2009.
8. Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council. Health risks from exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR VII phase 2. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2006.
9. Health Physics Society. Radiation risk in perspective. Position statement of the Health Physics Society: PS010-1. McLean, Va: Health Physics Society, 2004.
10. Kalender WA, Wolf H, Suess C, Gies M, Hentschel D, Bautz W. Dose reduction in CT by anatomically adapted tube current modulation: experimental results and first patient studies (abstr). Radiology 1997;205(P):471.
11. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology 2004;233(3):649-657.
12. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM Jr. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. RadioGraphics 2006;26(2):503-512. (Pubitemid 43515321)
13. Yu L, Bruesewitz MR, Thomas KB, Fletcher JG, Kofler JM, McCollough CH. Optimal tube potential for radiation dose reduction in pediatric CT: principles, clinical implementations, and pitfalls. RadioGraphics 2011;31(3):835-848.
14. Deak PD, Langner O, Lell M, Kalender WA. Effects of adaptive section collimation on patient radiation dose in multisection spiral CT. Radiology 2009;252(1):140-147.
15. Christner JA, Zavaletta VA, Eusemann CD, Walz-Flannigan AI, McCollough CH. Dose reduction in helical CT: dynamically adjustable z-axis x-ray beam collimation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(1):W49-W55.
16. Kachelriess M, Watzke O, Kalender WA. Generalized multi-dimensional adaptive filtering for conventional and spiral singleslice, multi-slice, and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2001;28(4):475-490. (Pubitemid 32323299)
17. Manduca A, Yu L, Trzasko JD, et al. Projection space denoising with bilateral filtering and CT noise modeling for dose reduction in CT. Med Phys 2009;36(11):4911-4919.
18. Li T, Li X, Wang J, et al. Nonlinear approach to sinogram smoothing for low-dose x-ray CT. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2004;51(5):2505-2513.
19. La Rivière PJ, Bian J, Vargas PA. Penalized-likelihood sinogram restoration for computed tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25(8):1022- 1036. (Pubitemid 44192174)
20. Borsdorf A, Raupach R, Flohr T, Hornegger J. Wavelet based noise reduction in CT-images using correlation analysis. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2008;27(12):1685-1703.
21. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34(11):4526-4544. (Pubitemid 350029675)
22. Bittencourt MS, Schmidt B, Seltmann M, et al. Iterative reconstruction in image space (IRIS) in cardiac computed tomography: initial experience. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2011;27(7):1081-1087.
23. 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 Am J Roentgenol 2010;194(1):191-199.
24. Jakobs TF, Becker CR, Ohnesorge B, et al. Multislice helical CT of the heart with retrospective ECG gating: reduction of radiation exposure by ECG-controlled tube current modulation. Eur Radiol 2002;12(5):1081-1086. (Pubitemid 36940173)
25. 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(1):234-243.
26. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257(2):373-383.
27. May MS, Wüst W, Brand M, et al. Dose reduction in abdominal computed tomography: intraindividual comparison of image quality of full-dose standard and half-dose iterative reconstructions with dual-source computed tomography. Invest Radiol 2011;46(7):465-470 .
28. Lubner MG, Pickhardt PJ, Tang J, Chen GH. Reduced image noise at low-dose multidetector CT of the abdomen with prior image constrained compressed sensing algorithm. Radiology 2011;260(1):248-256.
29. Chen L, Yu L, Leng S, McCollough CH. CT volume-of-interest (VOI) scanning: determination of radiation reduction outside the VOI (abstr). In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2011; 196.
30. Yu H, Wang G. Compressed sensing based interior tomography. Phys Med Biol 2009;54(9):2791-2805.
31. Srivastava S, Taguchi K. Sinogram restoration algorithm for photon counting clinical x-ray CT with pulse pileup compensation. Presented at the First International Meeting on Image Formation in X-Ray Computed Tomography. Salt Lake City, Utah, June 6-9, 2010.
32. Funama Y, Awai K, Nakayama Y, et al. Radiation dose reduction without degradation of low-contrast detectability at abdominal multisection CT with a low-tube voltage technique: phantom study. Radiology 2005;237(3):905-910. (Pubitemid 41636380)
33. Siegel MJ, 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(2):515-522. (Pubitemid 39423813)
34. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Mukundan S Jr, et al. Hypervascular liver tumors: low tube voltage, high tube current multi-detector row CT for enhanced detection-phantom study. Radiology 2008;246(1):125-132. (Pubitemid 350305035)
35. Kalender WA, Deak P, Kellermeier M, van Straten M, Vollmar SV. Application- and patient size-dependent optimization of x-ray spectra for CT. Med Phys 2009;36(3):993-1007.
36. Primak AN, Ramirez Giraldo JC, Liu X, Yu L, McCollough CH. Improved dual-energy material discrimination for dual-source CT by means of additional spectral filtration. Med Phys 2009;36(4):1359-1369.
37. Novak T, Hupfer M, Brauweiler R, Eisa F, Kalender W. Potential of high-z contrast agents in clinical contrast-enhanced computed tomography. Med Phys 2011;38(12):6469-6482.
38. Swank RK. Absorption and noise in x-ray phosphors. J Appl Phys 1973;44(9):4199-4203.
39. Barber WC, Nygard E, Iwanczyk JS, et al. Characterization of a novel photon counting detector for clinical CT: count rate, energy resolution, and noise performance. Proc SPIE 2009;7258:725824.
40. Feuerlein S, Roessl E, Proksa R, et al. Multienergy photon-counting k-edge imaging: potential for improved luminal depiction in vascular imaging. Radiology 2008;249(3):1010-1016.
41. Roessl E, Proksa R. K-edge imaging in xray computed tomography using multi-bin photon counting detectors. Phys Med Biol 2007;52(15):4679-4696. (Pubitemid 47103149)
42. Iwanczyk JS, Nygård E, Meirav O, et al. Photon counting energy dispersive detector arrays for x-ray imaging. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 2009;56(3):535-542.
43. Taguchi K, Zhang M, Frey EC, et al. Modeling the performance of a photon counting x-ray detector for CT: energy response and pulse pileup effects. Med Phys 2011;38(2):1089-1102.
44. Schlomka JP, Roessl E, Dorscheid R, et al. Experimental feasibility of multi-energy photon-counting k-edge imaging in pre-clinical computed tomography. Phys Med Biol 2008;53(15):4031-4047.
45. Shikhaliev PM. Computed tomography with energy-resolved detection: a feasibility study. Phys Med Biol 2008;53(5):1475-1495. (Pubitemid 351594438)
46. Shikhaliev PM. Beam hardening artefacts in computed tomography with photon counting, charge integrating and energy weighting detectors: a simulation study. Phys Med Biol 2005;50(24):5813-5827. (Pubitemid 41795835)
47. Schmidt TG. Optimal "image-based" weighting for energy-resolved CT. Med Phys 2009;36(7):3018-3027.
48. Frey EC, Wang X, Du Y, Taguchi K, Xu J, Tsui BMW. Investigation of the use of photon counting detectors with energy discrimination capability for material decomposition in micro-computed tomography. In: Hsieh J, Flynn MJ, eds. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 2007-physics of medical imaging. Vol 6510. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optical Engineering, 2007; 65100A-1-11.
49. Giersch J, Niederlöhner D, Anton G. The influence of energy weighting on x-ray imaging quality. Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res A 2004;531(1-2):68-74.
50. Yu Z, Thibault JB, Bouman CA, Sauer KD, Hsieh J. Fast model-based x-ray CT reconstruction using spatially nonhomogeneous ICD optimization. IEEE Trans Image Process 2011;20(1):161-175.
51. La Rivière PJ. Penalized-likelihood sinogram smoothing for low-dose CT. Med Phys 2005;32(6):1676-1683. (Pubitemid 40880561)
52. Wang J, Li T, Lu H, Liang Z. Penalized weighted least-squares approach to sinogram noise reduction and image recon struction for low-dose x-ray computed tomography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25(10):1272-1283. (Pubitemid 46417077)
53. Funama Y, Taguchi K, Utsunomiya D, et al. Combination of a low-tube-voltage technique with hybrid iterative reconstruction (iDose) algorithm at coronary computed tomographic angiography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2011;35(4):480-485.
54. Tipnis S, Ramachandra A, Huda W, et al. Iterative reconstruction in image space (IRIS) and lesion detection in abdominal CT. Proc SPIE 2010;7622:76222K.
55. Donoho D. Compressed sensing. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 2006;52(4):1289-1306.
56. Candès EJ, Tao T. Near-optimal signal recovery from random projections: universal encoding strategies? IEEE Trans Inf Theory 2006;52(12):5406-5425. (Pubitemid 46445381)
57. Candès EJ, Romberg J, Tao T. Robust uncertainty principles: exact signal reconstruction from highly incomplete frequency information. IEEE Trans Inf Theory 2006;52(2):489-509. (Pubitemid 43174093)
58. Candès E, Romberg J. Sparsity and incoherence in compressive sampling. Inverse Probl 2007;23(3):969-985. (Pubitemid 46838836)
59. Sidky EY, Kao CM, Pan X. Accurate image reconstruction from few-views and limitedangle data in divergent-beam CT. J Xray Sci Technol 2006;14(2):119-139. (Pubitemid 43893801)
60. Chen GH, Tang J, Leng S. Prior image constrained compressed sensing (PICCS): a method to accurately reconstruct dynamic CT images from highly undersampled projection data sets. Med Phys 2008;35(2):660-663. (Pubitemid 351190885)
61. Sidky EY, Pan X. Image reconstruction in circular cone-beam computed tomography by constrained, total-variation minimization. Phys Med Biol 2008;53(17):4777-4807.
62. Tang J, Nett BE, Chen GH. Performance comparison between total variation (TV)-based compressed sensing and statistical iterative reconstruction algorithms. Phys Med Biol 2009;54(19):5781-5804.
63. Noo F, Clackdoyle R, Pack JD. A twostep Hilbert transform method for 2D image reconstruction. Phys Med Biol 2004;49(17):3903-3923. (Pubitemid 39242984)
64. Yu L, Zou Y, Sidky EY, Pelizzari CA, Munro P, Pan X. Region of interest reconstruction from truncated data in circular cone-beam CT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25(7):869-881. (Pubitemid 44088372)
65. Kolditz D, Kyriakou Y, Kalender WA. Volume-of-interest (VOI) imaging in C-arm flat-detector CT for high image quality at reduced dose. Med Phys 2010;37(6):2719-2730.
66. Chen L, Shaw CC, Altunbas MC, et al. Feasibility of volume-of-interest (VOI) scanning technique in cone beam breast CT-a preliminary study. Med Phys 2008;35(8):3482-3490.
67. Hsieh J, Chao E, Thibault J, et al. A novel reconstruction algorithm to extend the CT scan field-of-view. Med Phys 2004;31(9):2385-2391. (Pubitemid 39287851)
68. Mayo JR, Whittall KP, Leung AN, et al. Simulated dose reduction in conventional chest CT: validation study. Radiology 1997;202(2):453-457. (Pubitemid 27051742)
69. van Gelder RE, Venema HW, Serlie IWO, et al. CT colonography at different radiation dose levels: feasibility of dose reduction. Radiology 2002;224(1):25-33. (Pubitemid 34680371)
70. Frush DP, Slack CC, Hollingsworth CL, et al. Computer-simulated radiation dose reduction for abdominal multidetector CT of pediatric patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179(5):1107-1113. (Pubitemid 35204359)
71. Karmazyn B, Frush DP, Applegate KE, Maxfield C, Cohen MD, Jones RP. CT with a computer-simulated dose reduction technique for detection of pediatric nephroureterolithiasis: comparison of standard and reduced radiation doses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;192(1):143-149.
72. Ciaschini MW, Remer EM, Baker ME, Lieber M, Herts BR. Urinary calculi: radiation dose reduction of 50% and 75% at CT-effect on sensitivity. Radiology 2009;251(1):105-111.
73. Leng S, Atwell TD, Yu L, et al. Radiation dose reduction for CT-guided renal tumor cryoablation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196(5):W586-W591.
74. CT accreditation program requirements. American College of Radiology Web site. http://www.acr.org/accreditation/computed/ct-reqs.aspx. Accessed January 9, 2012.
75. Boone JM. Determination of the presampled MTF in computed tomography. Med Phys 2001;28(3):356-360. (Pubitemid 32231692)
76. Hsieh J. Computed tomography: principles, design, artifacts, and recent advances. Bellingham, Wash: SPIE Press, 2003; 348-357.
77. Siewerdsen JH, Cunningham IA, Jaffray DA. A framework for noise-power spectrum analysis of multidimensional images. Med Phys 2002;29(11):2655-2671. (Pubitemid 35375465)
78. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. Medical imaging: the assessment of image quality. ICRU report 54. Bethesda, Md: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, 1995.
79. Barrett HH, Yao J, Rolland JP, Myers KJ. Model observers for assessment of image quality. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1993;90(21): 9758-9765. (Pubitemid 23328191)
80. Krupinski EA, Berbaum KS. The Medical Image Perception Society update on key issues for image perception research. Radiology 2009;253(1):230-233.
81. Gifford HC, King MA, de Vries DJ, Soares EJ. Channelized hotelling and human observer correlation for lesion detection in hepatic SPECT imaging. J Nucl Med 2000;41(3):514-521. (Pubitemid 30133973)
82. Sain JD, Barrett HH. Performance evaluation of a modular gamma camera using a detectability index. J Nucl Med 2003;44(1): 58-66. (Pubitemid 36077713)
83. Barrett HH, Furenlid LR, Freed M, et al. Adaptive SPECT. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2008;27(6):775-788. (Pubitemid 351760850)
84. Chawla AS, Samei E, Saunders R, Abbey C, Delong D. Effect of dose reduction on the detection of mammographic lesions: a mathematical observer model analysis. Med Phys 2007;34(8):3385-3398. (Pubitemid 47175804)
85. Burgess AE, Jacobson FL, Judy PF. Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. Med Phys 2001;28(4):419-437. (Pubitemid 32323293)
86. Chen LY, Barrett HH. Task-based lens design with application to digital mammography. J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis 2005;22(1):148-167. (Pubitemid 40168118)
87. Hill ML, Mainprize JG, Yaffe MJ. An observer model for lesion detectability in contrast- enhanced digital mammography. Lect Notes Comput Sci 2010;6136:720-727.
88. Richard S, Siewerdsen JH. Comparison of model and human observer performance for detection and discrimination tasks using dual-energy x-ray images. Med Phys 2008;35(11):5043-5053.
89. Reiser I, Nishikawa RM. Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. Med Phys 2010;37(4):1591-1600.
90. Richard S, Samei E. Quantitative imaging in breast tomosynthesis and CT: comparison of detection and estimation task performance. Med Phys 2010;37(6):2627-2637.
91. Gang GJ, Tward DJ, Lee J, Siewerdsen JH. Anatomical background and generalized detectability in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2010;37(5):1948-1965.
92. Tisdall MD, Atkins MS. Using human and model performance to compare MRI reconstructions. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25(11):1510-1517. (Pubitemid 44711699)
93. Judy PF, Swensson RG, Szulc M. Lesion detection and signal-to-noise ratio in CT images. Med Phys 1981;8(1):13-23. (Pubitemid 11138700)
94. Boedeker KL, Cooper VN, McNitt-Gray MF. Application of the noise power spectrum in modern diagnostic MDCT. I. Measurement of noise power spectra and noise equivalent quanta. Phys Med Biol 2007;52(14):4027-4046. (Pubitemid 47134624)
95. Wunderlich A, Noo F. Image covariance and lesion detectability in direct fan-beam x-ray computed tomography. Phys Med Biol 2008;53(10):2471-2493. (Pubitemid 351595089)
96. Richard S, Yadava G, Li X, Samei E. Predictive models for observer performance in CT: applications in protocol optimization. Proc SPIE 2011;7961:79610H.
97. Yu L, Leng S, Chen L, Kofler JM Jr, Mc-Collough CH. Prediction of human observer performance on a lesion-detection task in CT using channelized hotelling observer (abstr). In: Radiological Society of North America scientific assembly and annual meeting program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2011; 197.
98. Leng S, Yu L, Chen L, Ramirez Giraldo JC, McCollough CH. Correlation between model observer and human observer performance in CT imaging when lesion location is uncertain. Proc SPIE 2012;8313:83131M.