The role of pure iterative reconstruction in conventional dose CT enterography

Abdominal Imaging

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 251-257

  Murphy, Kevin P ^a   Crush, L ^a   McLaughlin, P D ^c   O’Sullivan, Hilary S ^a   Twomey, Maria ^b   Lynch, Sylvia ^b   Bye, J ^d   McSweeney, Sean E ^b   O’Connor, Owen J ^a,b   Shanahan, F ^a   Maher, Michael M ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

^b Department of Medicine National University of Ireland Cork   (Ireland)

^c VANCOUVER GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^d GE HEALTHCARE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computed tomography; Crohn's disease; Hybrid iterative reconstruction; Iterative reconstruction; Model based iterative reconstruction; Pure iterative reconstruction

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; IOHEXOL;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CROHN DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC USE; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT; HUMAN; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIATION DOSE; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CONTRAST MEDIA; CROHN DISEASE; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IOHEXOL; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84930181855     PISSN: 09428925     EISSN: 14320509     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00261-014-0222-x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Winklehner A, Karlo C, Puippe G, et al. (2011) Raw data-based iterative reconstruction in body CTA: evaluation of radiation dose saving potential. Eur Radiol 21(12):2521–2526
2. Singh S, Kalra MK, Do S, et al. (2012) Comparison of hybrid and pure iterative reconstruction techniques with conventional filtered back projection: dose reduction potential in the abdomen. J Comput Assist Tomogr 36(3):347–353
3. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Kambadakone AK, et al. (2010) Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 45(4):202–210
4. Nelson RC, Feuerlein S, Boll DT (2011) New iterative reconstruction techniques for cardiovascular computed tomography: how do they work, and what are the advantages and disadvantages? J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 5(5):286–292
5. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. (2012) Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 199(6):1266–1274
6. Yasaka K, Katsura M, Akahane M, et al. (2013) Model-based iterative reconstruction for reduction of radiation dose in abdominopelvic CT: comparison to adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. Springerplus 2(1):209
7. Craig O, O’Neill S, O’Neill F, et al. (2012) Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography using lower doses of radiation for patients with Crohn’s disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 10(8):886–892
8. Desai GS, Uppot RN, Yu EW, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV (2012) Impact of iterative reconstruction on image quality and radiation dose in multidetector CT of large body size adults. Eur Radiol 22(8):1631–1640
9. O’Neill SB, Mc Laughlin PD, Crush L, et al. (2013) A prospective feasibility study of sub-millisievert abdominopelvic CT using iterative reconstruction in Crohn’s disease. Eur Radiol 23(9):2503–2512
10. Vardhanabhuti V, Loader R, Roobottom CA (2013) 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 48(3):167–174
11. Suzuki S, Machida H, Tanaka I, Ueno E (2012) Measurement of vascular wall attenuation: comparison of CT angiography using model-based iterative reconstruction with standard filtered back-projection algorithm CT in vitro. Eur J Radiol 81(11):3348–3353
12. Suzuki S, Machida H, Tanaka I, Ueno E (2013) Vascular diameter measurement in CT angiography: comparison of model-based iterative reconstruction and standard filtered back projection algorithms in vitro. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200(3):652–657
13. Yoon MA, Kim SH, Lee JM, et al. (2012) Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and Veo: assessment of image quality and diagnostic performance in CT colonography at various radiation doses. J Comput Assist Tomogr 36(5):596–601
14. Suzuki S, Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, Ueno E (2014) Diameter measurement of vascular model on CT angiography using model-based iterative reconstruction: effect of tube current on accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 202(2):437–442
15. Katsura M, Sato J, Akahane M, et al. (2013) Comparison of pure and hybrid iterative reconstruction techniques with conventional filtered back projection: image quality assessment in the cervicothoracic region. Eur J Radiol 82(2):356–360
16. Machida H, Takeuchi H, Tanaka I, et al. (2013) Improved delineation of arteries in the posterior fossa of the brain by model-based iterative reconstruction in volume-rendered 3D CT angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 34(5):971–975
17. Shuman WP, Green DE, Busey JM, et al. (2013) Model-based iterative reconstruction versus adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection in liver 64-MDCT: focal lesion detection, lesion conspicuity, and image noise. AJR Am J Roentgenol 200(5):1071–1076
18. Vardhanabhuti V, Ilyas S, Gutteridge C, Freeman SJ, Roobottom CA (2013) Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi. Insights Imaging 4(5):661–669
19. Deák Z, Grimm JM, Treitl M, et al. (2013) Filtered back projection, adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction, and a model-based iterative reconstruction in abdominal CT: an experimental clinical study. Radiology 266(1):197–206
20. Lee SJ, Park SH, Kim AY, et al. (2011) A prospective comparison of standard-dose CT enterography and 50% reduced-dose CT enterography with and without noise reduction for evaluating Crohn disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 197(1):50–57
21. Kambadakone AR, Chaudhary NA, Desai GS, et al. (2011) Low-dose MDCT and CT enterography of patients with Crohn disease: feasibility of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 196(6):W743–W752
22. Kaza RK, Platt JF, Al-Hawary MM, et al. (2012) CT enterography at 80 kVp with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus at 120 kVp with standard reconstruction: image quality, diagnostic adequacy, and dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198(5):1084–1092
23. Brady SL, Kaufman RA (2012) Investigation of American Association of Physicists in Medicine Report 204 size-specific dose estimates for pediatric CT implementation. Radiology 265(3):832–840
24. Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, et al. (2010) 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 254(1):145–153
25. Bongartz G, Geleijns J, Golding S, et al. (1999) European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. European Commission.
26. Siddiki HA, Fidler JL, Fletcher JG, et al. (2009) Prospective comparison of state-of-the-art MR enterography and CT enterography in small-bowel Crohn’s disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193(1):113–121
27. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. (2010) Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 257(2):373–383
28. Desmond AN, O’Regan K, Malik N, et al. (2012) Selection of symptomatic patients with Crohn’s disease for abdominopelvic computed tomography: role of serum C-reactive protein. Can Assoc Radiol J 63:267–274.
29. Jackson VP, Cushing T, Abujudeh HH, et al. (2009) RADPEER scoring white paper. J Am Coll Radiol 6(1):21–25.