Degradation of CT low-contrast spatial resolution due to the use of iterative reconstruction and reduced dose levels

Radiology

Volumn 276, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 499-506

  McCollough, Cynthia H ^a   Yu, Lifeng ^a   Kofler, James M ^a   Leng, Shuai ^a   Zhang, Yi ^a   Li, Zhoubo ^a   Carter, Rickey E ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONE BEAM COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; FILTERED BACK PROJECTION; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE; LOW CONTRAST SPATIAL RESOLUTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTION; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; RADIOLOGY PHANTOM; REPEAT PROCEDURE; VISIBILITY; IMAGE QUALITY; PROCEDURES; RADIATION DOSE;

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

EID: 84935838086     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.15142047     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A three-dimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34(11):4526-4544.
2. Yu L, Vrieze TJ, Leng S, Kofler J, Fletcher JG, McCollough CH. Measuring the contrast-dependent spatial resolution of CT iterative reconstruction methods at very low contrast values [abstr]. In: Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting Program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2013; 212.
3. Ehman EC, Yu L, Manduca A, et al. Methods for clinical evaluation of noise reduction techniques in abdominopelvic CT. RadioGraphics 2014;34(4):849-862.
4. CT accreditation phantom instructions. American College of Radiology. http://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Documents/Accreditation/CT/PhantomTestingInstruction.pdf. Published May 23, 2013. Accessed May 7, 2014.
5. McCollough CH, Bruesewitz MR, McNitt-Gray MF, et al. The phantom portion of the American College of Radiology (ACR) computed tomography (CT) accreditation program: practical tips, artifact examples, and pitfalls to avoid. Med Phys 2004;31(9):2423-2442.
6. Kofler JM Jr, Yu L, Leng S, Zhang Y, Li Z, McCollough CH. Iterative reconstructions and low contrast resolution measurements: are ACR accreditation threshold values still valid? [abstr]. In: Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting Program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2013; 201.
7. Yu L, Kofler JM Jr, Leng S, et al. CT radiation dose reduction and iterative reconstruction (IR): how low can you go and still achieve ACR CT accreditation [abstr]. In: Radiological Society of North America Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting Program. Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America, 2012; 215.
8. Baker ME, Dong F, Primak A, et al. Contrast-to-noise 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 Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(1):8-18.
9. Schindera ST, Odedra D, Raza SA, et al. Iterative reconstruction algorithm for CT: can radiation dose be decreased while low-contrast detectability is preserved? Radiology 2013;269(2):511-518.
10. Goenka AH, Herts BR, Obuchowski NA, et al. Effect of reduced radiation exposure and iterative reconstruction on detection of lowcontrast low-attenuation lesions in an anthropomorphic liver phantom: an 18-reader study. Radiology 2014;272(1):154-163.
11. Evaluation of Medicines for Human Use. Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority (CPMP/EWP/482/99). London, UK. The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/2009/09/WC500003658.pdf. Published July 27, 2000. Accessed May 7, 2014.
12. 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 Am J Roentgenol 2012;199(6):1266-1274.
13. 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 Am J Roentgenol 2009;193(3):764-771.
14. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257(2):373-383.
15. Kalra MK, Woisetschläger M, Dahlström N, et al. Radiation dose reduction with Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction technique for abdominal computed tomography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2012;36(3):339-346.