Performance of adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D integrated with automatic tube current modulation in radiation dose and image noise reduction compared with filtered-back projection for 80-kVp abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic phantom and patient study

Comparison of CT image quality between the AIDR 3D and FIRST iterative reconstruction algorithms: an assessment based on phantom measurements and clinical images

Modern CT iterative reconstruction algorithms are transitioning from a statistical-based to model-based approach. However, increasing complexity does not ensure improved image quality for all indications, and thorough characterization of new algorithms is important to understand their potential clinical impacts. This study performs both quantitative and qualitative analyses of image quality to compare Canon's statistical-based Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) algorithm to its model-based algorithm, Forward-projected model-based Iterative Reconstruction SoluTion(FIRST). A phantom was used to measure the task-specific modulation transfer function (MTF_Task), the noise power spectrum (NPS), and the low-contrast object-specific CNR (CNR_LO) for each algorithm using three dose levels and the convolution algorithm (kernel) appropriate for abdomen, lung, and brain imaging. Additionally, MTF_Taskwas measured at four contrast levels, and CNR_LOwas measured for two object sizes. Lastly, three radiologists participated in a preference study to compare clinical image quality for three study types: non-contrast abdomen, pulmonary embolism (PE), and lung screening. Nine questions related to the appearance of anatomical features or image quality characteristics were scored for twenty exams of each type. The behavior of both algorithms depended strongly on the kernel selected. Phantom measurements suggest that FIRST should be beneficial over AIDR 3D for abdomen imaging, but do not suggest a clear overall benefit to FIRST for lung or brain imaging; metrics suggest performance may be equivalent to or slightly favor AIDR 3D, depending on the size of the object being imaged and whether spatial resolution or low-contrast resolution is more important for the task at hand. Overall, radiologists strongly preferred AIDR 3D for lung screening, slightly preferred AIDR 3D for non-contrast abdomen, and had no preference for PE. FIRST was superior for the reduction of metal artifacts. Radiologist preference may be influenced by changes to noise texture.

Optimal slice thickness of brain computed tomography using a hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm for identifying hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign of acute ischemic stroke

PURPOSE

To determine the optimal slice thickness of brain non-contrast computed tomography using a hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm to identify hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 30 patients who had presented hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign and 30 patients who showed no acute ischemic change in acute magnetic resonance imaging. Reformatted axial images at an angle of the orbitomeatal line in slice thicknesses of 0.5, 1, 3, 5, and 7 mm were generated. Optimal slice thickness for identifying hyperdense middle cerebral artery sign was evaluated by a receiver operating characteristics curve analysis and area under the curve (AUC).

RESULTS

The mean AUC value of 0.5-mm slice (0.921; 95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.868 to 0.975) was significantly higher than those of 3-mm (0.791; 95% CI, 0.686 to 0.895; p = 0.041), 5-mm (0.691; 95% CI, 0.583 to 0.799, p < 0.001), and 7-mm (0.695; 95% CI, 0.593 to 0.797, p < 0.001) slices, whereas it was equivalent to that of 1-mm slice (0.901; 95% CI, 0.837 to 0.965, p = 0.751).

CONCLUSION

Thin slice thickness of ≤ 1 mm has a better diagnostic performance for identifying hyperdense artery sign on brain non-contrast computed tomography with a hybrid iterative reconstruction algorithm in patients with acute ischemic stroke.

Image quality of early postoperative CT angiography with reduced contrast material and radiation dose using model-based iterative reconstruction for screening of renal pseudoaneurysms after partial nephrectomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the image quality of early postoperative CT angiography with low contrast material and radiation dose using model-based iterative reconstruction (FIRST) for screening pseudoaneurysms after partial nephrectomy.

METHODS

CT angiography was obtained before surgery using conventional iterative dose reduction reconstruction (AIDR 3D) with 120 kVp and 600 mgI/kg of contrast material and obtained after partial nephrectomy using FIRST with 80-100 kVp and 360 mgI/kg in 35 patients. Contrast-to-noise ratio, visual image quality scores using a 5-point scale, and longest length of the unaffected renal arteries on maximum intensity projection images were retrospectively compared between FIRST and AIDR 3D.

RESULTS

No significant differences existed in contrast-to-noise ratio or image quality scores of the renal arteries between FIRST and AIDR 3D (25.8 ± 6.6 vs. 25.4 ± 7.0, p = 0.991 and 4.8 ± 0.4 vs. 4.5 ± 0.9, p = 0.515, respectively). Visualization scores and longest length of the peripheral renal arteries in FIRST were significantly superior to those of AIDR 3D (4.3 ± 0.8 vs. 3.5 ± 1.0, p < 0.001 and 100.4 ± 14.9 mm vs. 90.2 ± 15.7 mm, p = 0.010, respectively). The dose-length product with FIRST was significantly lower than that with AIDR 3D (566.1 ± 217.4 mGy.cm vs. 829.8 ± 324.9 mGy.cm, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

FIRST can improve visualization of the peripheral renal arteries with contrast material and radiation dose reduced by approximately 30 % compared with AIDR 3D, which enables adequate evaluation of pseudoaneurysms after partial nephrectomy.

LOW-DOSE COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY OF THE PARANASAL SINUSES: PERFORMANCE OF TWO DIFFERENT ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION ALGORITHMS

To evaluate the performance of two iterative reconstruction algorithms in low-dose paranasal sinus computed tomography (CT). Sinus CT scans were reconstructed using Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D, n = 36 patients) or Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE, n = 32 patients). Reconstructed images were evaluated regarding subjective image quality, depiction of anatomic landmarks and noise (HU). Dose-length product (DLP), calculated effective dose (ED) and CT dose index (CTDIvol) were documented for each scan. Images were not significantly different in subjective image quality (p = 0.09) and conspicuity of anatomic landmarks (p = 0.28). Noise was significantly lower in images reconstructed with AIDR 3D (p = 0.012). DLP, ED and CTDIvol were significantly lower in the SAFIRE datasets (each p < 0.001). The results indicate that iterative reconstruction, independent of the manufacturer, enables for imaging the paranasal sinuses with an ED below 0.1 mSv while ensuring diagnostic image quality.

Comparison of image noise and image quality between full-dose abdominal computed tomography scans reconstructed with weighted filtered back projection and half-dose scans reconstructed with improved sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE*)

PURPOSE

To retrospectively compare the image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and subjective image quality between CT images acquired with a dual-source, split-dose imaging protocol reconstructed at full and half doses with weighted filtered back projection (wFBP) and an improved sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction algorithm (SAFIRE*).

METHODS

Fifty-three consecutive patients underwent contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen using a standardized dual-source, single energy CT protocol. Half-dose images were retrospectively generated using data from one detector only. Full-dose datasets were reconstructed with wFBP, while half-dose datasets were reconstructed with wFBP and SAFIRE* strengths 1-5. Region of interest analysis was performed to assess SNR and noise. Diagnostic acceptability, subjective noise, and spatial resolution were graded on a 10-point scale by two readers. Statistical analysis was carried out with repeated measures analysis of variance, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and Cohen's κ test.

RESULTS

With the increasing strengths of SAFIRE*, a progressive reduction in noise and increase in SNR (p < 0.01) was observed. There was a statistically significant decrease in objective noise and increase in SNR in half-dose SAFIRE* strength 4 and 5 reconstructions compared to full-dose reconstructions using wFBP (p < 0.01). Qualitative analysis revealed a progressive increase in diagnostic acceptability, decrease in subjective noise and increase in spatial resolution for half-dose images reconstructed with the increasing strengths of SAFIRE* (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Half-dose CT images reconstructed with SAFIRE* at strength 4 and 5 have superior image quality compared to full-dose images reconstructed with wFBP. SAFIRE* potentially allows dose reductions in the order of 50% over wFBP.

Reduction of the radiation dose and the amount of contrast material in hepatic dynamic CT using low tube voltage and adaptive iterative dose reduction 3-dimensional

The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the image quality and the diagnostic ability of low tube voltage and reduced contrast material dose hepatic dynamic computed tomography (CT) reconstructed with adaptive iterative dose reduction 3-dimensional (AIDR 3D).Eighty-nine patients underwent hepatic dynamic CT using one of the 2 protocols: tube voltage of 120 kVp, contrast dose of 600 mgI/kg, and filtered back projection in Protocol A (n = 46), and tube voltage of 100 kVp, contrast dose of 500 mgI/kg, and AIDR 3D in Protocol B (n = 43). The volume CT dose index (CTDIvol) and size-specific dose estimates (SSDEs) were compared between the 2 groups. Objective image noise and tumor to liver contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were also compared. Three radiologists independently reviewed image quality. The jackknife alternative free-response receiver-operating characteristic (JAFROC) analysis was performed to compare diagnostic performance.The mean CTDIvol and SSDE of Protocol B (14.3 and 20.2, respectively) were significantly lower than those of Protocol A (22.1 and 31.4, P < .001). There were no significant differences in either objective image noise or CNR. In the qualitative analysis, 2 readers assigned significant lower scores to images of Protocol B for at least one of the 3 phases regarding overall image quality (P < .05). There was no significant difference in the JAFROC1 figure of merit between protocols.Low tube voltage CT with AIDR 3D yielded a reduction in radiation dose and in the amount of contrast material while maintaining diagnostic performance.