Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to report preliminary results of an ongoing prospective trial of ultralow-dose abdominal MDCT. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Imaging with standard-dose contrast-enhanced (n = 21) and unenhanced (n = 24) clinical abdominal MDCT protocols was immediately followed by ultralow-dose imaging of a matched series of 45 consecutively registered adults (mean age, 57.9 years; mean body mass index, 28.5). The ultralow-dose images were reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR), and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR). Standard-dose series were reconstructed with FBP (reference standard). Image noise was measured at multiple predefined sites. Two blinded abdominal radiologists interpreted randomly presented ultralow-dose images for multilevel subjective image quality (5-point scale) and depiction of organ-based focal lesions. RESULTS Mean dose reduction relative to the standard series was 74% (median, 78%; range, 57-88%; mean effective dose, 1.90 mSv). Mean multiorgan image noise for low-dose MBIR was 14.7 ± 2.6 HU, significantly lower than standard-dose FBP (28.9 ± 9.9 HU), low-dose FBP (59.2 ± 23.3 HU), and ASIR (45.6 ± 14.1 HU) (p < 0.001). The mean subjective image quality score for low-dose MBIR (3.0 ± 0.5) was significantly higher than for low-dose FBP (1.6 ± 0.7) and ASIR (1.8 ± 0.7) (p < 0.001). Readers identified 213 focal noncalcific lesions with standard-dose FBP. Pooled lesion detection was higher for low-dose MBIR (79.3% [169/213]) compared with low-dose FBP (66.2% [141/213]) and ASIR (62.0% [132/213]) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION MBIR shows great potential for substantially reducing radiation doses at routine abdominal CT. Both FBP and ASIR are limited in this regard owing to reduced image quality and diagnostic capability. Further investigation is needed to determine the optimal dose level for MBIR that maintains adequate diagnostic performance. In general, objective and subjective image quality measurements do not necessarily correlate with diagnostic performance at ultralow-dose CT.

[1]  J. Bourland.  American Association of Physicists in Medicine , 2001 .

[2]  David J Brenner,et al.  Mass screening with CT colonography: should the radiation exposure be of concern? , 2005, Gastroenterology.

[3]  James L Mulshine,et al.  Lung cancer screening. , 2005, The oncologist.

[4]  Guang-Hong Chen,et al.  Prior image constrained compressed sensing (PICCS) , 2008, SPIE BiOS.

[5]  Alvin C. Silva,et al.  Iterative Reconstruction Technique for Reducing Body Radiation Dose at Ct: Feasibility Study Hara Et Al. Ct Iterative Reconstruction Technique Gastrointestinal Imaging Original Research , 2022 .

[6]  D. Broga,et al.  Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States , 2009 .

[7]  Mahadevappa Mahesh,et al.  NCRP Report Number 160: its significance to medical imaging. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[8]  L. Tanoue.  Computed Tomography — An Increasing Source of Radiation Exposure , 2009 .

[9]  W. Kalender,et al.  Multisection CT protocols: sex- and age-specific conversion factors used to determine effective dose from dose-length product. , 2010, Radiology.

[10]  William Pavlicek,et al.  Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[11]  Jiang Hsieh,et al.  Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. , 2010, Radiology.

[12]  D. Sahani,et al.  Reducing Abdominal CT Radiation Dose With Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction Technique , 2010, Investigative radiology.

[13]  Alvin C. Silva,et al.  Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: A pilot study. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[14]  S. Park,et al.  A prospective comparison of standard-dose CT enterography and 50% reduced-dose CT enterography with and without noise reduction for evaluating Crohn disease. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  Guang-Hong Chen,et al.  Reduced image noise at low-dose multidetector CT of the abdomen with prior image constrained compressed sensing algorithm. , 2011, Radiology.

[16]  William P. Shuman,et al.  Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus filtered back projection in the same patient: 64 channel liver CT image quality and patient radiation dose , 2011, European Radiology.

[17]  Ernst J Rummeny,et al.  Initial performance characterization of a clinical noise-suppressing reconstruction algorithm for MDCT. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  Naveen M. Kulkarni,et al.  Low-dose MDCT and CT enterography of patients with Crohn disease: feasibility of adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[19]  Jacques Felblinger,et al.  CT image quality improvement using adaptive iterative dose reduction with wide-volume acquisition on 320-detector CT , 2012, European Radiology.

[20]  Geoffrey D. Rubin,et al.  Body CT: technical advances for improving safety. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[21]  K. P. Kim,et al.  Radiation exposure from CT scans in childhood and subsequent risk of leukaemia and brain tumours: a retrospective cohort study , 2012, The Lancet.

[22]  Patrik Rogalla,et al.  Iterative reconstruction algorithm for CT: can radiation dose be decreased while low-contrast detectability is preserved? , 2013, Radiology.

[23]  William Pavlicek,et al.  Reducing body CT radiation dose: beyond just changing the numbers. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[24]  D. Hough,et al.  Pilot Study of Detection, Radiologist Confidence and Image Quality With Sinogram-Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction at Half–Routine Dose Level , 2013, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[25]  Daniel Kolditz,et al.  Assessment of patient dose from CT localizer radiographs. , 2013, Medical physics.

[26]  Jorge M. Fuentes-Orrego,et al.  Low-dose CT in clinical diagnostics. , 2013, Expert opinion on medical diagnostics.

[27]  J. Platt,et al.  CT angiography in the abdomen: a pictorial review and update , 2014, Abdominal Imaging.

[28]  Alice R. Goldman,et al.  Reducing radiation dose in body CT: a primer on dose metrics and key CT technical parameters. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[29]  Varut Vardhanabhuti,et al.  Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi , 2013, Insights into Imaging.

[30]  M. Goodsitt,et al.  Model-based iterative reconstruction: effect on patient radiation dose and image quality in pediatric body CT. , 2013, Radiology.

[31]  Ken D. Sauer,et al.  Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for Dual-Energy X-Ray CT Using a Joint Quadratic Likelihood Model , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[32]  M. Goodsitt,et al.  Emerging techniques for dose optimization in abdominal CT. , 2014, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.