Impact of dose reduction and iterative model reconstruction on multi-detector CT imaging of the brain in patients with suspected ischemic stroke

Computed Tomography of the Head : A Systematic Review on Acquisition and Reconstruction Techniques to Reduce Radiation Dose

In 1971, the first computed tomography (CT) scan was performed on a patient's brain. Clinical CT systems were introduced in 1974 and dedicated to head imaging only. New technological developments, broader availability, and the clinical success of CT led to a steady growth in examination numbers. Most frequent indications for non-contrast CT (NCCT) of the head include the assessment of ischemia and stroke, intracranial hemorrhage and trauma, while CT angiography (CTA) has become the standard for first-line cerebrovascular evaluation; however, resulting improvements in patient management and clinical outcomes come at the cost of radiation exposure, increasing the risk for secondary morbidity. Therefore, radiation dose optimization should always be part of technical advancements in CT imaging but how can the dose be optimized? What dose reduction can be achieved without compromising diagnostic value, and what is the potential of the upcoming technologies artificial intelligence and photon counting CT? In this article, we look for answers to these questions by reviewing dose reduction techniques with respect to the major clinical indications of NCCT and CTA of the head, including a brief perspective on what to expect from current and future developments in CT technology with respect to radiation dose optimization.

Iterative Reconstruction: State-of-the-Art and Future Perspectives

ABSTRACT

Image reconstruction processing in computed tomography (CT) has evolved tremendously since its creation, succeeding at optimizing radiation dose while maintaining adequate image quality. Computed tomography vendors have developed and implemented various technical advances, such as automatic noise reduction filters, automatic exposure control, and refined imaging reconstruction algorithms.Focusing on imaging reconstruction, filtered back-projection has represented the standard reconstruction algorithm for over 3 decades, obtaining adequate image quality at standard radiation dose exposures. To overcome filtered back-projection reconstruction flaws in low-dose CT data sets, advanced iterative reconstruction algorithms consisting of either backward projection or both backward and forward projections have been developed, with the goal to enable low-dose CT acquisitions with high image quality. Iterative reconstruction techniques play a key role in routine workflow implementation (eg, screening protocols, vascular and pediatric applications), in quantitative CT imaging applications, and in dose exposure limitation in oncologic patients.Therefore, this review aims to provide an overview of the technical principles and the main clinical application of iterative reconstruction algorithms, focusing on the strengths and weaknesses, in addition to integrating future perspectives in the new era of artificial intelligence.

"Image quality evaluation of the Precise image CT deep learning reconstruction algorithm compared to Filtered Back-projection and iDose4: a phantom study at different dose levels"

PURPOSE

To characterize the performance of the Precise Image (PI) deep learning reconstruction (DLR) algorithm for abdominal Computed Tomography (CT) imaging.

METHODS

CT images of the Catphan-600 phantom (equipped with an external annulus) were acquired using an abdominal protocol at four dose levels and reconstructed using FBP, iDose⁴ (levels 2,5) and PI ('Soft Tissue' definition, levels 'Sharper','Sharp','Standard','Smooth','Smoother'). Image noise, image non-uniformity, noise power spectrum (NPS), target transfer function (TTF), detectability index (d'), CT numbers accuracy and image histograms were analyzed.

RESULTS

The behavior of the PI algorithm depended strongly on the selected level of reconstruction. The phantom analysis suggested that the PI image noise decreased linearly by varying the level of reconstruction from Sharper to Smoother, expressing a noise reduction up to 80% with respect to FBP. Additionally, the non-uniformity decreased, the histograms became narrower, and d' values increased as PI reconstruction levels changed from Sharper to Smoother. PI had no significant impact on the average CT number of different contrast objects. The conventional FBP NPS was deeply altered only by Smooth and Smoother levels of reconstruction. Furthermore, spatial resolution was found to be dose- and contrast-dependent, but in each analyzed condition it was greater than or comparable to FBP and iDose⁴ TTFs.

CONCLUSIONS

The PI algorithm can reduce image noise with respect to FBP and iDose⁴; spatial resolution, CT numbers and image uniformity are generally preserved by the algorithm but changes in NPS for the Smooth and Smoother levels need to be considered in protocols implementation.