Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique for Radiation Dose Reduction in Chest CT: A Pilot Study

Singh, Sarabjeet; Kalra, Mannudeep K.; Gilman, Matthew D.; Hsieh, Jiang; Pien, Homer; Digumarthy, Subba R.; Shepard, Jo-Anne O.

doi:10.1148/radiol.11101450

Cited by 314 publications

(188 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

176

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At first, since the reconstruction with a given percentage of the IR algorithm means weighted blend of the FBP and the ASiR or ASiR‐V,20, 21 the behavior of the FBPs of the two CTs has to be taken into account.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction ASiR‐V: Assessment of noise performance in comparison to ASiR

Marco

Origgi

2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo assess the noise characteristics of the new adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASiR‐V) in comparison to ASiR.MethodsA water phantom was acquired with common clinical scanning parameters, at five different levels of CTDIvol. Images were reconstructed with different kernels (STD, SOFT, and BONE), different IR levels (40%, 60%, and 100%) and different slice thickness (ST) (0.625 and 2.5 mm), both for ASiR‐V and ASiR. Noise properties were investigated and noise power spectrum (NPS) was evaluated.ResultsASiR‐V significantly reduced noise relative to FBP: noise reduction was in the range 23%–60% for a 0.625 mm ST and 12%–64% for the 2.5 mm ST. Above 2 mGy, noise reduction for ASiR‐V had no dependence on dose. Noise reduction for ASIR‐V has dependence on ST, being greater for STD and SOFT kernels at 2.5 mm. For the STD kernel ASiR‐V has greater noise reduction for both ST, if compared to ASiR. For the SOFT kernel, results varies according to dose and ST, while for BONE kernel ASIR‐V shows less noise reduction. NPS for CT Revolution has dose dependent behavior at lower doses. NPS for ASIR‐V and ASiR is similar, showing a shift toward lower frequencies as the IR level increases for STD and SOFT kernels. The NPS is different between ASiR‐V and ASIR with BONE kernel. NPS for ASiR‐V appears to be ST dependent, having a shift toward lower frequencies for 2.5 mm ST.ConclusionsASiR‐V showed greater noise reduction than ASiR for STD and SOFT kernels, while keeping the same NPS. For the BONE kernel, ASiR‐V presents a completely different behavior, with less noise reduction and modified NPS. Noise properties of the ASiR‐V are dependent on reconstruction slice thickness. The noise properties of ASiR‐V suggest the need for further measurements and efforts to establish new CT protocols to optimize clinical imaging.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction ASiR‐V: Assessment of noise performance in comparison to ASiR

Marco

Origgi

2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Iterative reconstruction algorithms have been shown to maintain image quality through noise reduction despite a decreased radiation dose in chest CT examinations [22]. Higher iterative reconstruction algorithm levels were shown to be preferable [23 -25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Dose Reduction in Computed Tomography-Guided Lung Interventions using an Iterative Reconstruction Technique

Chang

Hiss

Müeller

et al. 2015

Fortschr Röntgenstr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interventional Radiology 906Chang DH et al. Ergebnisse: Es gab keine signifikanten Unterschiede bezüglich der diagnostischen Akzeptanz und der Komplikationsrate in beiden Gruppen. Im Vergleich zu SDCT erreichte LDCT eine Dosisreduktion im Median um 68,6 %. Die Implementation der iterativen Rekonstruktion war bezüglich der Rauschunterdrückung und der subjektiven Bildqualität der FBP überlegen. Bezüglich der Aufhärtungsartefakte ergab sich kein Unterschied zwischen beiden Gruppen. Schlussfolgerung: Das LDCT-Protokoll erzielt eine signifikante Reduktion der Strahlenexposition um mehr als 2/3, während die diagnostische Sicherheit und Präzision beibehalten werden. Die iterative Rekonstruktion ist, aus der Analyse der objektiven und subjektiven Auswertung der Bildqualität zu bevorzugen. Kernaussagen:▶ Niedrigdosisprotokolle (LDCT) sind bei CT-gesteuerten Interventionen an der Lunge bezüg-Abstract ! Purpose: To compare the radiation doses and image qualities of computed tomography (CT)-guided interventions using a standard-dose CT (SDCT) protocol with filtered back projection and a lowdose CT (LDCT) protocol with both filtered back projection and iterative reconstruction. Materials and Methods: Image quality and radiation doses (dose-length product and CT dose index) were retrospectively reviewed for 130 patients who underwent CT-guided lung interventions. SDCT at 120 kVp and automatic mA modulation and LDCT at 100 kVp and a fixed exposure were each performed for 65 patients. Image quality was objectively evaluated as the contrast-to-noise ratio and subjectively by two radiologists for noise impression, sharpness, artifacts and diagnostic acceptability on a four-point scale.Results: The groups did not significantly differ in terms of diagnostic acceptability and complication rate. LDCT yielded a median 68.6 % reduction in the radiation dose relative to SDCT. In the LDCT group, iterative reconstruction was superior to filtered back projection in terms of noise reduction and subjective image quality. The groups did not differ in terms of beam hardening artifacts. Conclusion: LDCT was feasible for all procedures and yielded a more than two-thirds reduction in radiation exposure while maintaining overall diagnostic acceptability, safety and precision. The iterative reconstruction algorithm is preferable according to the objective and subjective image quality analyses.

show abstract

“…The scans were also repeated using lower tube currents (100, 75, 50, 25, and 10 mA); fixed tube currents were used to maintain consistency with both the NLST technique and the clinical lung screening protocol used at our facility at the time of this study. All images were reconstructed with filtered back‐projection (FBP), 50% ASIR (ASiR; GE Healthcare), and MBIR (Veo; GE Healthcare); a standard reconstruction kernel was used for FBP and 50% ASIR (a blend of 50% ASIR was chosen based on prior literature (5) ). …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation dose reduction for CT lung cancer screening using ASIR and MBIR: a phantom study

Mathieu

Fox

et al. 2014

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to reduce the radiation dosage associated with computed tomography (CT) lung cancer screening while maintaining overall diagnostic image quality and definition of ground‐glass opacities (GGOs). A lung screening phantom and a multipurpose chest phantom were used to quantitatively assess the performance of two iterative image reconstruction algorithms (adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model‐based iterative reconstruction (MBIR)) used in conjunction with reduced tube currents relative to a standard clinical lung cancer screening protocol (51 effective mAs (3.9 mGy) and filtered back‐projection (FBP) reconstruction). To further assess the algorithms' performances, qualitative image analysis was conducted (in the form of a reader study) using the multipurpose chest phantom, which was implanted with GGOs of two densities. Our quantitative image analysis indicated that tube current, and thus radiation dose, could be reduced by 40% or 80% from ASIR or MBIR, respectively, compared with conventional FBP, while maintaining similar image noise magnitude and contrast‐to‐noise ratio. The qualitative portion of our study, which assessed reader preference, yielded similar results, indicating that dose could be reduced by 60% (to 20 effective mAs (1.6 mGy)) with either ASIR or MBIR, while maintaining GGO definition. Additionally, the readers' preferences (as indicated by their ratings) regarding overall image quality were equal or better (for a given dose) when using ASIR or MBIR, compared with FBP. In conclusion, combining ASIR or MBIR with reduced tube current may allow for lower doses while maintaining overall diagnostic image quality, as well as GGO definition, during CT lung cancer screening.PACS numbers: 87.57.Q‐, 87.57.nf

show abstract

Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique for Radiation Dose Reduction in Chest CT: A Pilot Study

Abstract: http://radiology.rsna.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1148/radiol.11101450/-/DC1.

Cited by 314 publications

References 27 publications

New adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction ASiR‐V: Assessment of noise performance in comparison to ASiR

New adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction ASiR‐V: Assessment of noise performance in comparison to ASiR

Radiation Dose Reduction in Computed Tomography-Guided Lung Interventions using an Iterative Reconstruction Technique

Radiation dose reduction for CT lung cancer screening using ASIR and MBIR: a phantom study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About