Reduction of effective dose and organ dose to the eye lens in head MDCT using iterative image reconstruction and automatic tube current modulation

Biomedical Papers

Volumn 158, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 265-272

  Ryska, Pavel ^a   Kvasnicka, Tomas ^a   Jandura, Jiri ^a   Klzo, Ludovit ^a   Grepl, Jakub ^a   Zizka, Jan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL HRADEC KRALOVE   (Czech Republic)

Author keywords

Cataract; Eye lens; Image reconstruction; Multidetector computed tomography; Radiation effects

Indexed keywords

ADULT; BRAIN; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; LENS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOGRAPHY; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BRAIN; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LENS, CRYSTALLINE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIATION DOSAGE; SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO;

EID: 84903608305     PISSN: 12138118     EISSN: 18047521     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5507/bp.2013.071     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Mettler FA Jr, Bhargavan M, Faulkner K, Gilley DB, Gray JE, Ibbott GS, Lipoti JA, Mahesh M, McCrohan JL, Stabin MG, Thomadsen BR, Yoshizumi TT. Radiologic and nuclear medicine studies in the United States and worldwide: frequency, radiation dose, and comparison with other radiation sources 1950-2007. Radiology 2009;253:520-31.
2. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Hamberg LM, Blake MA, Shepard JA, Saini S. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619-28.
3. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: an increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357:2277-84.
4. Rockmore AJ, Macovski A. A maximum likelihood approach to emission image reconstruction from projections. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci 1976;23:1428-32.
5. Leipsic J, Labounty T, Heilbron B, Min JK, Mancini GB, Lin FY, Taylor C, Dunning A, Earls JP. Estimated radiation dose reduction using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction in coronary CT angiography: the ERASIR study. Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:655-60.
6. Pontana F, Pagniez J, Flohr T, Faivre JB, Duhamel A, Remy J, Remy- Jardin M. Chest computed tomography using iterative reconstruction vs filtered back projection (Part 1): evaluation of image noise reduction in 32 patients. Eur Radiol 2011;21:636-43.
7. Schauer DA, Linton OW. NCRP report no. 160, ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States, medical exposure: are we doing less with more, and is there a role for health physicists? Health Phys 2009;97:1-5.
8. Larson DB, Johnson LW, Schnell BM, Salisbury SR, Forman HP. National trends in CT use in the emergency department: 1995 - 2007. Radiology 2011;258:164-73.
9. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. Medical radiation exposures, annex A. New York: United Nations; 2010.
10. Sodickson A, Baeyens PF, Andriole KP, Prevedello LM, Nawfel RD, Hanson R, Khorasani R. Recurrent CT, cumulative radiation exposure, and associated radiation-induced cancer risks from CT of adults. Radiology 2009;251:175-84.
11. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, Kim KP, Mahesh M, Gould R, Berrington de González A, Miglioretti DL. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2078-86.
12. Tan JSP, Tan KL, Lee JCL, Wan CM, Leong JL, Chan LL. Comparison of eye lens dose on neuroimaging protocols between 16- and 64-section multidetector CT: achieving the lowest possible dose. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:373-7.
13. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, Kofler JM. CT dose reduction and dose management tools: overview of available options. Radiographics 2006;26:503-12.
14. Schindera ST, Nauer C, Treier R, Trueb P, von Allmen G, Vock P, Szucs- Farkas Z. Strategien zur Reduktion der CT-Strahlendosis. Radiologe 2010;50:1120-7.
15. Smith B, Dillon WR, Gould R, Wintermark M. Radiation dose-reduction strategies for neuroradiology CT protocols. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1628-32.
16. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh JA, Licato PE, Do S, Pien HH, Blake MA. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257:373-83.
17. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Ackman JB, Digumarthy SR, Hsieh J, Do S, Shepard JA, Gilman MD. Diffuse lung disease: CT of the chest with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Radiology 2010;256:261-9.
18. Leipsic J, LaBounty TM, Heilbron B, Min JK, Mancini GB, Lin FY, Taylor C, Dunning A, Earls JP. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: assessment of image noise and image quality in coronary CT angiography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:649-54.
19. Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, Silva AC, Paden RG, Wu Q. Abdominal CT: comparison of lowdose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:713-9.
20. 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 Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:126-31.
21. Mitsumori LM, Shuman WP, Busey JM, Kolokythas O, Koprowicz KM. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection in the same patient: 64 channel liver CT image quality and patient radiation dose. Eur Radiol 2012;22:138-43.
22. 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 Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:1095-9.
23. Singh S, Kalra MK, Gilman MD, Hsieh J, Pien HH, Digumarthy SR, Shepard JA. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique for radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a pilot study. Radiology 2011;259:565-73.
24. Cornfeld D, Israel G, Detroy E, Bokhari J, Mojibian H. Impact of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) on radiation dose and image quality in aortic dissection studies: a qualitative and quantitative analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:W336-40.
25. Ren Q, Dewan SK, Li M, Li J, Mao D, Wang Z, Hua Y. Comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques in brain CT. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:2597-601.
26. Kilic K, Erbas G, Guryildirim M, Arac M, Ilgit E, Coskun B. Lowering the dose in head CT using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1578-82.
27. Rapalino O, Kamalian S, Kamalian S, Payabvash S, Souza LC, Zhang D, Mukta J, Sahani DV, Lev MH, Pomerantz SR. Cranial CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: improved image quality with concomitant radiation dose reduction. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:609-15.
28. Korn A, Fenchel M, Bender B, Danz S, Hauser TK, Ketelsen D, Flohr T, Claussen CD, Heuschmid M, Ernemann U, Brodoefel H. Iterative reconstruction in head CT: image quality of routine and low-dose protocols in comparison with standard filtered back-projection. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:218-24.
29. International Commission on Radiological Protection Statement on tissue reactions. International Commission on Radiological Protection, ref 4825-3093-1464, Seoul; 2011. Available from: https:// pop.iaea.org/RPOP/RPoP/Content/Documents/Whitepapers/ICRPstatements- tissue-reactions.pdf. Accessed 2013 May 20.
30. European Commission. European Guidelines on Quality Criteria for Computed Tomography. European Commission, EUR 16262, Brussels; 2004. Available from: http://www.msct.eu/CT_Quality_ Criteria.htm. Accessed 2013 June 3.