Hybrid iterative reconstruction technique for abdominal CT protocols in obese patients: Assessment of image quality, radiation dose, and low-contrast detectability in a phantom

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 202, Issue 2, 2014, Pages

  Schindera, Sebastian T ^a,b   Odedra, Devang ^a   Mercer, Diego ^a   Thipphavong, Seng ^a   Chou, Paul ^a   Szucs Farkas, Zsolt ^c   Rogalla, Patrik ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HEALTH NETWORK   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BASEL   (Switzerland)

^c Hospital Center Biel   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

CT; Image quality; Iterative reconstruction technique; Obese patients; Radiation dose

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ABDOMINAL SCINTISCANNING; ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION; IMAGE NOISE LEVEL; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NOISE REDUCTION; OBESITY; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STANDARD;

HUMANS; OBESITY; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84892742975     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.12.10513     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Mun EC, Blackburn GL, Matthews JB. Current status of medical and surgical therapy for obesity. Gastroenterology 2001; 120:669-681
2. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Blake MA, et al. Detection and characterization of lesions on low-radiation-dose abdominal CT images postprocessed with noise reduction filters. Radiology 2004; 232:791-797
3. Funama Y, Awai K, Miyazaki O, et al. Improvement of low-contrast detectability in low-dose hepatic multidetector computed tomography using a novel adaptive filter: evaluation with a computer-simulated liver including tumors. Invest Radiol 2006; 41:1-7
4. Schindera ST, Nelson RC, Toth TL, et al. Effect of patient size on radiation dose for abdominal MDCT with automatic tube current modulation: phantom study. AJR 2008; 190:[web]W100-W105
5. 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
6. 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
7. 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
8. Baker ME, Dong F, Primak A, et al. Contrast-tonoise 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. AJR 2012; 199:8-18
9. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR 2012; 199:1266-1274
10. Desai GS, Uppot RN, Yu EW, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV. Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose in multidetector CT of large body size adults. Eur Radiol 2012; 22:1631-1640
11. Menke J. Comparison of different body size parameters for individual dose adaptation in body CT of adults. Radiology 2005; 236:565-571
12. 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
13. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33:159-174
14. Schindera ST, Torrente JC, Ruder TD, et al. Decreased detection of hypovascular liver tumors with MDCT in obese patients: a phantom study. AJR 2011; 196:[web]W772-W776
15. Sardanelli F, Hunink MG, Gilbert FJ, Di Leo G, Krestin GP. Evidence-based radiology: why and how? Eur Radiol 2010; 20:1-15
16. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88-94
17. Miéville FA, Gudinchet F, Brunelle F, Bochud FO, Verdun FR. Iterative reconstruction methods in two different MDCT scanners: physical metrics and 4-alternative forced-choice detectability experiments - a phantom approach. Phys Med 2013; 29:99-110
18. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Kamath RS, et al. Sixteen-detector row CT of abdomen and pelvis: study for optimization of Z-axis modulation technique performed in 153 patients. Radiology 2004; 233:241-249
19. Wilting JE, Zwartkruis A, van Leeuwen MS, Timmer J, Kamphuis AG, Feldberg M. A rational approach to dose reduction in CT: individualized scan protocols. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:2627-2632
20. Li J, Udayasankar UK, Tang X, Toth TL, Small WC, Kalra MK. Patient size compensated automatic tube current modulation in multi-detector row CT of the abdomen and pelvis. Acad Radiol 2011; 18:205-211
21. Schindera ST, Diedrichsen L, Müller 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