Computed tomography radiation dose reduction: Effect of different iterative reconstruction algorithms on image quality

Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography

Volumn 38, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 815-823

  Willemink, Martin J ^a   Takx, Richard A P ^a   De Jong, Pim A ^a   Budde, Ricardo P J ^a   Bleys, Ronald L A W ^a   Das, Marco ^b   Wildberger, Joachim E ^b   Prokop, Mathias ^c   Buls, Nico ^d   De Mey, Johan ^d   Leiner, Tim ^a   Schilham, Arnold M R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER UTRECHT   (Netherlands)

^b MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BRUSSELS   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Image quality; Iterative reconstruction

Indexed keywords

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE METHODS; PHANTOMS; RADIATION EFFECTS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO; THREE DIMENSIONAL COMPUTER GRAPHICS;

CHEST PHANTOM; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST-TO-NOISE RATIO; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION; FILTERED BACK-PROJECTION; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION ALGORITHMS; MODEL BASED ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; NOISE LEVELS; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTIONS;

IMAGE QUALITY;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTRAST TO NOISE RATIO; HUMAN; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; IMAGING PHANTOM; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION ALGORITHM; NOISE REDUCTION; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTION; SIGNAL NOISE RATIO; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVICES; IMAGE PROCESSING; PROCEDURES; RADIATION DOSE; STANDARDS;

ALGORITHMS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIATION DOSAGE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84918567552     PISSN: 03638715     EISSN: 15323145     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0000000000000128     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Xu J, Mahesh M, Tsui BM. Is iterative reconstruction ready for MDCT? J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6:274-276.
2. Lee TY, Chhem RK. Impact of new technologies on dose reduction in CT. Eur J Radiol. 2010;76:28-35.
3. Willemink MJ, de Jong PA, Leiner T, et al. Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography Part 1: Technical principles. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1623-1631.
4. Chang W, Lee JM, Lee K, et al. Assessment of a model-based, iterative reconstruction algorithm (MBIR) regarding image quality and dose reduction in liver computed tomography. Invest Radiol. 2013;48:598-606.
5. Willemink MJ, Leiner T, de Jong PA, et al. Iterative reconstruction techniques for computed tomography Part 2: initial results in dose reduction and image quality. Eur Radiol. 2013;23:1632-1642.
6. Beister M, Kolditz D, Kalender WA. Iterative reconstruction methods in x-ray CT. Phys Med. 2012;28:94-108.
7. Irwan B, Nakanishi S, Blum A. AIDR 3D-reduces dose and simultaneously improves image quality. Toshiba Medical Systems Whitepaper. Available at: http://www.toshiba-medical.eu/upload/TMSE-CT/White%20Papers/White%20Papers/Toshiba-White%20paper %20CT-nov11.pdf?epslanguage=en. Accessed February 19, 2014.
8. Mehta D, Thompson R, Morton T, et al. Iterative model reconstruction: simultaneously lowered computed tomography radiation dose and improved image quality. Int J Med Phys. 2013;1:147-155.
9. Scibelli A. iDose4 iterative reconstruction technique. Philips Healthcare Whitepaper. Available at: http://acceptance.netforum.healthcare.philips. com//Clinical/ImageHandler.ashx?Id=591399. Accessed February 19, 2014.
10. Thibault JB. Veo: CT Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction. GE Healthcare Whitepaper. Available at: http://www.gehealthcare.com/dose/pdfs/Veo-white-paper.pdf. Accessed February 19, 2014.
11. McCollough CH, Ulzheimer S, Halliburton SS, et al. Coronary artery calcium: a multi-institutional, multimanufacturer international standard for quantification at cardiac CT. Radiology. 2007;243:527-538.
12. Vardhanabhuti V, Loader R, Roobottom CA. Assessment of image quality on effects of varying tube voltage and automatic tube current modulation with hybrid and pure iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal/pelvic CT: a phantom study. Invest Radiol. 2013;48:167-174.
13. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, et al. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys. 2007;34:4526-4544.
14. Willemink MJ, Schilham AM, Leiner T, et al. Iterative reconstruction does not substantially delay CT imaging in an emergency setting. Insights Imaging. 2013;4:391-397.
15. 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;35:480-485.
16. 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 Am J Roentgenol. 2010;195:655-660.
17. 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.
18. Scheffel H, Stolzmann P, Schlett CL, et al. Coronary artery plaques: cardiac CTwith model-based and adaptive-statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Eur J Radiol. 2011;81:e363-e369.
19. Vardhanabhuti V, Loader RJ, Mitchell GR, et al. Image quality assessment of standard-and low-dose chest CT using filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and novel model-based iterative reconstruction algorithms. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:545-552.
20. Kachelriess M. Iterative reconstruction techniques: what do they mean for cardiac CT? Curr Cardiovasc Imaging Rep. 2013;6:268-281.