Low-dose CT for patients with clinically suspected acute appendicitis: Optimal strength of sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction for image quality and diagnostic performance

Acta Radiologica

Volumn 56, Issue 8, 2015, Pages 899-907

  Kim, Seung Ho ^a   Yoon, Jung Hee ^a   Lee, Jang Hee ^a   Lim, Yun Jung ^a   Kim, Ok Hwa ^a   Ryu, Ji Hwa ^a   Son, Jung Hee ^a  

^a Inje University College of Medicine   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Appendicitis; Computed tomography; Image reconstruction; Iterative reconstruction; Radiation dosage

Indexed keywords

DIAGNOSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGE QUALITY; IMAGE RECONSTRUCTION; ITERATIVE METHODS; TOMOGRAPHY;

ACUTE APPENDICITIS; APPENDICITIS; CONFIDENCE SCORE; DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE; ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION EXPOSURE; SUBJECTIVE IMAGE QUALITY;

COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY;

IOHEXOL;

ACUTE APPENDICITIS; ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; LOW ENERGY RADIATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION DOSE REDUCTION; RADIATION RESPONSE; SCORING SYSTEM; ABDOMEN, ACUTE; ABDOMINAL RADIOGRAPHY; ADOLESCENT; AGED; ALGORITHM; APPENDICITIS; COMPLICATION; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; PROCEDURES; RADIATION DOSE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; VERY ELDERLY; YOUNG ADULT;

ABDOMEN, ACUTE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; APPENDICITIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIATION DOSAGE; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOGRAPHY, ABDOMINAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84941960759     PISSN: 02841851     EISSN: 16000455     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0284185114542297     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Buckius MT, McGrath B, Monk J, et al. Changing epidemiology of acute appendicitis in the United States: Study period 1993-2008. J Surg Res 2012;175: 185-190.
2. Poletti PA, Platon A, De Perrot T, et al. Acute appendicitis: Prospective evaluation of a diagnostic algorithm integrating ultrasound and low-dose CT to reduce the need of standard CT. Eur Radiol 2011;21: 2558-2566.
3. Brenner DJ, Hall EJ. Computed tomography: An increasing source of radiation exposure. N Engl J Med 2007;357: 2277-2284.
4. Brenner DJ. Slowing the increase in the population dose resulting from CT scans. Radiat Res 2010;174: 809-815.
5. Berrington de González A, Mahesh M, Kim KP, et al. Projected cancer risks from computed tomographic scans performed in the United States in 2007. Arch Intern Med 2009;169: 2071-2077.
6. Fefferman NR, Bomsztyk E, Yim AM, et al. Appendicitis in children: Low-dose CT with a phantombased simulation technique-initial observations. Radiology 2005;237: 641-646.
7. Seo H, Lee KH, Kim HJ, et al. Diagnosis of acute appendicitis with sliding slab ray-sum interpretation of low-dose unenhanced CT and standard-dose i.v. contrast-enhanced CT scans. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193: 96-105.
8. Keyzer C, Tack D, de Maertelaer V, et al. Acute appendicitis: Comparison of low-dose and standard-dose unenhanced multi-detector row CT. Radiology 2004;232: 164-172.
9. Keyzer C, Cullus P, Tack D, et al. MDCT for suspected acute appendicitis in adults: Impact of oral and IV contrast media at standard-dose and simulated low-dose techniques. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193: 1272-1281.
10. Kim SY, Lee KH, Kim K, et al. Acute appendicitis in young adults: Low-versus standard-radiation-dose contrast-enhanced abdominal CT for diagnosis. Radiology 2011;260: 437-445.
11. Paulson EK, Coursey CA. CT protocols for acute appendicitis: Time for change. Am J Roentgenol 2009;193: 1268-1271.
12. Baker ME, Dong F, Primak A, et al. Contrast-to-noise ratio and low-contrast object resolution on full-and lowdose MDCT: SAFIRE versus filtered back projection in a low-contrast object phantom and in the liver. Am J Roentgenol 2012;199: 8-18.
13. 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.
14. Han BK, Grant KL, Garberich R, et al. Assessment of an iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE) on image quality in pediatric cardiac CT datasets. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr 2012;6: 200-204.
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: 339-346.
16. Kulkarni NM, Uppot RN, Eisner BH, et al. Radiation dose reduction at multidetector CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for evaluation of urolithiasis: How low can we go? Radiology 2012;265: 158-166.
17. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, et al. Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): Initial results of a prospective trail comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. Am J Roentgenol 2012;199: 1-9.
18. Booya F, Fletcher JG, Huprich JE, et al. Active Crohn disease: CT findings and interobserver agreement for enteric phase CT enterography. Radiology 2006;241: 787-795.
19. International Commission on Radiological Protection. 2007 recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann ICRP 2007;37: 1-34.
20. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM). Size-specific dose estimates(SSDE) in pediatric and adult body CT examinations. AAPM report no. 204. College Park, MD: AAPM, 2011: 1-26.
21. Bankier AA, Kressel HY. Through the Looking Glass revisited: The need for more meaning and less drama in the reporting of dose and dose reduction in CT. Radiology 2012;265: 4-8.
22. EUR 16262. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. Available at http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/htmlindex.htm (accessed 4 June 2014)
23. Birnbaum BA, Wilson SR. Appendicitis at the millennium. Radiology 2000;215: 337-348.
24. Desai GS, Kambadakone AR, Sahani DV. Performance of low dose abdomen CT images reconstructed with Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) and Filtered Back Projection (FBP) (abstr SSA06-07). In: 2012 Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) Annual Meeting Program. Chicago, USA, http://rsna2012.rsna.org/search.
25. Ebersberger U, Tricarico F, Schoepf UJ, et al. CT evaluation of coronary artery stents with iterative image reconstruction: Improvements in image quality and potential for radiation dose reduction. Eur Radiol 2013;23: 125-132.
26. Smith-Bindman R, Lipson J, Marcus R, et al. Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. Arch Intern Med 2009;169: 2078-2086.
27. Kim SH, Baek SH, Yoon JH, et al. Quarter regular dose non-enhanced CT for urinary stone: Added value of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. Acta Radiol 2013 Nov 20 [Epub ahead of print].