Assessment of image quality in abdominal CT: potential dose reduction with model-based iterative reconstruction

PurposeTo estimate potential dose reduction in abdominal CT by visually comparing images reconstructed with filtered back projection (FBP) and strengths of 3 and 5 of a specific MBIR.Material and methodsA dual-source scanner was used to obtain three data sets each for 50 recruited patients with 30, 70 and 100% tube loads (mean CTDIvol 1.9, 3.4 and 6.2 mGy). Six image criteria were assessed independently by five radiologists. Potential dose reduction was estimated with Visual Grading Regression (VGR).ResultsComparing 30 and 70% tube load, improved image quality was observed as a significant strong effect of log tube load and reconstruction method with potential dose reduction relative to FBP of 22–47% for MBIR strength 3 (p < 0.001). For MBIR strength 5 no dose reduction was possible for image criteria 1 (liver parenchyma), but dose reduction between 34 and 74% was achieved for other criteria. Interobserver reliability showed agreement of 71–76% (κw 0.201–0.286) and intra-observer reliability of 82–96% (κw 0.525–0.783).ConclusionMBIR showed improved image quality compared to FBP with positive correlation between MBIR strength and increasing potential dose reduction for all but one image criterion.Key Points• MBIR’s main advantage is its de-noising properties, which facilitates dose reduction.• MBIR allows for potential dose reduction in relation to FBP.• Visual Grading Regression (VGR) produces direct numerical estimates of potential dose reduction.• MBIR strengths 3 and 5 dose reductions were 22–34 and 34–74%.• MBIR strength 5 demonstrates inferior performance for liver parenchyma.

[1]  Mannudeep K Kalra,et al.  CT Radiation: Key Concepts for Gentle and Wise Use. , 2015, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[2]  Laureline Berteloot,et al.  Model-based iterative reconstruction in pediatric chest CT: assessment of image quality in a prospective study of children with cystic fibrosis , 2013, Pediatric Radiology.

[3]  Daniel Kolditz,et al.  Iterative reconstruction methods in X-ray CT. , 2012, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[4]  Örjan Smedby,et al.  Regression models for analyzing radiological visual grading studies – an empirical comparison , 2015, BMC Medical Imaging.

[5]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Diagnostic Performance of an Advanced Modeled Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm for Low-Contrast Detectability with a Third-Generation Dual-Source Multidetector CT Scanner: Potential for Radiation Dose Reduction in a Multireader Study. , 2015, Radiology.

[6]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Effect of Radiation Dose Reduction and Reconstruction Algorithm on Image Noise, Contrast, Resolution, and Detectability of Subtle Hypoattenuating Liver Lesions at Multidetector CT: Filtered Back Projection versus a Commercial Model-based Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm. , 2017, Radiology.

[7]  J. Fessler,et al.  Modelling the physics in the iterative reconstruction for transmission computed tomography , 2013, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Application of adaptive non-linear 2D and 3D postprocessing filters for reduced dose abdominal CT , 2012, Acta radiologica.

[9]  Bram Stieltjes,et al.  Erratum to: Impact of model-based iterative reconstruction on low-contrast lesion detection and image quality in abdominal CT: a 12-reader-based comparative phantom study with filtered back projection at different tube voltages , 2017, European Radiology.

[10]  H. Alkadhi,et al.  PATIENT EXPOSURE OPTIMISATION THROUGH TASK-BASED ASSESSMENT OF A NEW MODEL-BASED ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE , 2016, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[11]  F. Verdun,et al.  EXPOSURE OF THE SWISS POPULATION BY RADIODIAGNOSTICS: 2013 REVIEW , 2016, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[12]  K. Ng,et al.  Is utilisation of computed tomography justified in clinical practice? Part IV: applications of paediatric computed tomography. , 2010, Singapore medical journal.

[13]  V. Abraira,et al.  Generalization of the Kappa coeficient for ordinal categorical data, multiple observers and incomplete designs , 1999 .

[14]  W E CHAMBERLAIN,et al.  Tuberculosis case finding; a comparison of the effectiveness of various roentgenographic and photofluorographic methods. , 1947, Journal of the American Medical Association.

[15]  Bram Stieltjes,et al.  Impact of model-based iterative reconstruction on low-contrast lesion detection and image quality in abdominal CT: a 12-reader-based comparative phantom study with filtered back projection at different tube voltages , 2017, European Radiology.

[16]  Lu Liu,et al.  Model-based Iterative Reconstruction: A Promising Algorithm for Today's Computed Tomography Imaging. , 2014, Journal of medical imaging and radiation sciences.

[17]  D. Sahani,et al.  Iterative Reconstruction Techniques in Abdominopelvic CT: Technical Concepts and Clinical Implementation. , 2015, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  J. Goo,et al.  Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve: Practical Review for Radiologists , 2004, Korean journal of radiology.

[19]  Trafton Drew,et al.  Scanners and drillers: characterizing expert visual search through volumetric images. , 2013, Journal of vision.

[20]  O Smedby,et al.  Visual grading regression: analysing data from visual grading experiments with regression models. , 2010, The British journal of radiology.

[21]  Atul Padole,et al.  Assessment of Filtered Back Projection, Adaptive Statistical, and Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction for Reduced Dose Abdominal Computed Tomography , 2015, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[22]  J. Beregi,et al.  Which dose for what image? Iterative reconstruction for CT scan. , 2013, Diagnostic and interventional imaging.

[23]  C. I. Silk Tuberculosis Case Finding , 1941 .

[24]  Patient dose and image quality in low-dose abdominal CT: a comparison between iterative reconstruction and filtered back projection , 2013, Acta radiologica.

[25]  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.

[26]  K. Ledenius,et al.  ASSESSMENT OF CLINICAL IMAGE QUALITY IN PAEDIATRIC ABDOMINAL CT EXAMINATIONS: DEPENDENCY ON THE LEVEL OF ADAPTIVE STATISTICAL ITERATIVE RECONSTRUCTION (ASiR) AND THE TYPE OF CONVOLUTION KERNEL. , 2016, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[27]  Masaaki Kawahashi,et al.  Renovation of Journal of Visualization , 2010, J. Vis..

[28]  C. Metz ROC Methodology in Radiologic Imaging , 1986, Investigative radiology.

[29]  A. Luciani,et al.  Use of Model-Based Iterative Reconstruction (MBIR) in reduced-dose CT for routine follow-up of patients with malignant lymphoma: dose savings, image quality and phantom study , 2015, European Radiology.

[30]  J. B. Andosca,et al.  Tuberculosis case finding. , 1946, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  H. Zeng,et al.  Telbivudine Versus Entecavir for Nucleos(t)ide-Naive HBeAg-Positive Chronic Hepatitis B: A Meta-analysis , 2014, The American journal of the medical sciences.

[32]  William Pavlicek,et al.  How I do it: managing radiation dose in CT. , 2014, Radiology.

[33]  O. Smedby,et al.  Quantifying the potential for dose reduction with visual grading regression. , 2012, The British journal of radiology.

[34]  U. Schoepf,et al.  Single- and dual-energy CT of the abdomen: comparison of radiation dose and image quality of 2nd and 3rd generation dual-source CT , 2017, European Radiology.

[35]  Michael Romann,et al.  Validation of digit-length ratio (2D:4D) assessments on the basis of DXA-derived hand scans , 2015, BMC Medical Imaging.

[36]  R. D. Stoffey,et al.  MDCT Physics: The Basics—Technology, Image Quality and Radiation Dose , 2011 .

[37]  Michael M Maher,et al.  Computed tomography and patient risk: Facts, perceptions and uncertainties , 2016, World journal of radiology.

[38]  Joon Koo Han,et al.  Assessment of a Model-Based, Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm (MBIR) Regarding Image Quality and Dose Reduction in Liver Computed Tomography , 2013, Investigative radiology.

[39]  S Gordic,et al.  Advanced modelled iterative reconstruction for abdominal CT: qualitative and quantitative evaluation. , 2014, Clinical radiology.

[40]  D. Miglioretti,et al.  Radiation dose associated with common computed tomography examinations and the associated lifetime attributable risk of cancer. , 2009, Archives of internal medicine.