Can sinogram-affirmed iterative (SAFIRE) reconstruction improve imaging quality on low-dose lung CT screening compared with traditional filtered back projection (FBP) reconstruction?

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 37, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 301-305

  Yang, Wen Jie ^a   Yan, Fu Hua ^a   Liu, Bo ^b   Pang, Li Fang ^a   Hou, Liang ^a   Zhang, Huan ^a   Pan, Zi Lai ^a   Chen, Ke Min ^a  

^a SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SIEMENS LTD   (China)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Image reconstruction; Lung; Mass screening; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE METHODS;

COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; FILTERED BACK-PROJECTION; IMAGE NOISE; IMAGES RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; LOW DOSE; LUNG; MASS SCREENINGS; SINOGRAMS;

IMAGE QUALITY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BODY MASS; BODY WEIGHT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION RECONSTRUCTION; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MASS SCREENING; NOISE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION RESPONSE; RADIOLOGIST; SCORING SYSTEM; SINOGRAM AFFIRMED ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

EID: 84875418087     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: 15323145     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e31827b8c66     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Mayo JR, Aldrich J, Muller NL;, Fleischner Society. Radiation exposure at chest CT: A statement of the Fleischner Society. Radiology. 2003;228:15-21
2. Koller CJ, Eatough JP, Bettridge A. Variations in radiation dose between the same model of multislice CT scanner at different hospitals. Br J Radiol. 2003;76:798-802
3. Kuehn BM. FDA warning: CT scans exceeded proper doses. JAMA. 2010;303:124
4. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Adams AM, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:395-409
5. McNitt-Gray MF. AAPM/RSNA physics tutorial for residents: Topics in CTVradiation dose in CT. RadioGraphics. 2002;22:1541-1553
6. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, et al. Techniques and applications of automatic tube current modulation for CT. Radiology. 2004; 233:649-657
7. Ravenel JG, Scalzetti EM, Huda W, et al. Radiation exposure and image quality in chest CT examinations. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;177:279-284
8. Lucaya J, Piqueras J, Garcia-Pena P, et al. Low-dose high-resolution CT of the chest in children and young adults: Dose, cooperation, artifact incidence, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:985-992
9. Campbell J, Kalra MK, Rizzo S, et al. Scanning beyond anatomic limits of the thorax in chest CT: Findings, radiation dose, and automatic tube current modulation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185:1525-1530
10. National Lung Screening Trial Research Team, Aberle DR, Berg CD, et al. The national lung screening trial: Overview and study design. Radiology. 2011;258:243-253
11. Larke FJ, Kruger RL, Cagnon CH, et al. Estimated radiation dose associated with low-dose chest CT of average-size participants in the National Lung Screening Trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:1165-1169
12. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, et al. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: Feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:764-771
13. Liu YJ, Zhu PP, Chen B, et al. A new iterative algorithm to reconstruct the refractive index. Phys Med Biol. 2007;52:L5-L13
14. 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
15. Winklehner A, Karlo C, Puippe G, et al. Raw dataYbased iterative reconstruction in body CTA: Evaluation of radiation dose saving potential. Eur Radiol. 2011;21:2521-2526
16. Wang R, Schoepf UJ, Wu R, et al. Image quality and radiation dose of low dose coronary CT angiography in obese patients: Sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81:3141-3145
17. Pontana F, Pagniez J, Flohr T, et al. Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection (part 1): Evaluation of image noise reduction in 32 patients. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21:627-635
18. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Digumarthy SR, et al. Radiation dose reduction with chest computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique: Initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2010;34:40-45
19. Singh S, Kalra MK, Gilman MD, et al. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique for radiation dose reduction in chest CT: A pilot study. Radiology. 2011;259:565-573
20. EUR 16262. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Available at: Http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/ download/eur16262.w51. Accessed June 10, 2012
21. Lee TY, Chhem RK. Impact of new technologies on dose reduction in CT. Eur J Radiol. 2010;76:28-35
22. Prasad SR, Wittram C, Shepard JA, et al. Standard-dose and 50%-reduced-dose chest CT: Comparing the effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179:461-465
23. Mulkens TH, Bellinck P, Baeyaert M, et al. Use of an automatic exposure control mechanism for dose optimization in multi-detector row CT examinations: Clinical evaluation. Radiology. 2005; 237:213-223
24. Mastora I, Remy-Jardin M, Delannoy V, et al. Multi-detector row spiral CT angiography of the thoracic outlet: Dose reduction with anatomically adapted online tube current modulation and preset dose savings. Radiology. 2004;230:116-124
25. Kubo T, Nishino M, Kino A, et al. 3-Dimensional adaptive raw-data filter: Evaluation in low dose chest multidetector-row computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2006;30:933-938