Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study
To step-wise evaluate image quality of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) in reduced-dose (RD) thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) compared to full-dose (FD) and RD filtered back projection (FBP) in a longitudinal study. 122 patients were included in this prospective study. 49...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2017-07, Vol.12 (7), p.e0180302-e0180302 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | e0180302 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | e0180302 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 12 |
| creator | Scharf, Michael Brendel, Stephanie Melzer, Katja Hentschke, Christian May, Matthias Uder, Michael Lell, Michael M |
| description | To step-wise evaluate image quality of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) in reduced-dose (RD) thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) compared to full-dose (FD) and RD filtered back projection (FBP) in a longitudinal study.
122 patients were included in this prospective study. 49 patients (14 men: mean age ± SD, 56±0.4 years; 35 women: 58±1.3 years) completed FD, RD1 (80%-dose) and RD2 (60%-dose) thoracoabdominal CT. Each CT dataset was reconstructed with FBP and SAFIRE. For quantitative image analysis image noise was measured in defined tissue regions. Qualitative image evaluation was performed according to the European Guidelines on Quality criteria for CT. Additionally artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and edge sharpness were assessed.
Compared to FD-FBP noise in soft tissue increased by 12% in RD1-FBP and 27% in RD2-FBP reconstructions, whereas SAFIRE lead to a decrease of 28% (RD1) and 17% (RD2), respectively (all p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0180302 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_1916507236</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A497770757</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_6fa021ce607e4ce4ae87b71c0a6558ca</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A497770757</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-f42d7094ba32ec644849db17487d677d18079ff9dc6678c7cc315a1d0f1d37583</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptUl1r2zAUNWNj7br9g7EJ9tJBk0n-kOyXQgjtFigM2u5Z3OjDUbClVJIL-Xv7ZVMStzSj-EHS1TlH9x6fLPtM8JQUjPxYu8Fb6KYbZ9UUkxoXOH-TnZKmyCc0x8XbF_uT7EMIa4yroqb0fXaS15TVNalPs7-LHlqFHgboTNxeIGmgtS5EIxAIMXgQqQhWoo2LykYDHdLOIw8JGI2zSLqgkFdyEPujsSiuXKI5WErXm9Qhmt9foCEY26I7Y13roUczrY3vlUSLqHwSelToVglnQ_Sj0Pnd7Hpxe_UdRSVW1jwMaqcNqHO2NXGQe-WQNtuP2TsNXVCfxvUs-3N9dT__Nbn5_XMxn91MRNUUcaLLXDLclEsociVoWdZlI5eElTWTlDGZHGSN1o0UNJkjmBAFqYBIrIksWFUXZ9nXg-6mc4GP9gdOGkIrzPKCJsTigJAO1nzjTQ9-yx0Yvi8433LwydpOcaoB50QoipkqhSpB1WzJiMBAq6oWkLQux9eGZTJKJPM9dEeixzfWrHjrHnlVNikLu3bPRwHvknsh8t4EoboOrHLDoe_kR1Pv-v72H_T16UZUC2kAY7VL74qdKJ-VDWMMs4ol1PQVVPqk6k36w0qbVD8ilAeC8C4Er_TzjATzXdKfmuG7pPMx6Yn25aU_z6SnaBf_ADLt_ts</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1916507236</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Scharf, Michael ; Brendel, Stephanie ; Melzer, Katja ; Hentschke, Christian ; May, Matthias ; Uder, Michael ; Lell, Michael M</creator><contributor>Dubois, Ludwig</contributor><creatorcontrib>Scharf, Michael ; Brendel, Stephanie ; Melzer, Katja ; Hentschke, Christian ; May, Matthias ; Uder, Michael ; Lell, Michael M ; Dubois, Ludwig</creatorcontrib><description>To step-wise evaluate image quality of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) in reduced-dose (RD) thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) compared to full-dose (FD) and RD filtered back projection (FBP) in a longitudinal study.
122 patients were included in this prospective study. 49 patients (14 men: mean age ± SD, 56±0.4 years; 35 women: 58±1.3 years) completed FD, RD1 (80%-dose) and RD2 (60%-dose) thoracoabdominal CT. Each CT dataset was reconstructed with FBP and SAFIRE. For quantitative image analysis image noise was measured in defined tissue regions. Qualitative image evaluation was performed according to the European Guidelines on Quality criteria for CT. Additionally artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and edge sharpness were assessed.
Compared to FD-FBP noise in soft tissue increased by 12% in RD1-FBP and 27% in RD2-FBP reconstructions, whereas SAFIRE lead to a decrease of 28% (RD1) and 17% (RD2), respectively (all p <0.001). Visually sharp reproduction, lesion conspicuity, edge sharpness of pathologic findings, and overall image quality did not differ statistically significant between FD-FBP and RD-SAFIRE datasets. Image quality decreased in RD1- and RD2-FBP compared to FD-FBP, reaching statistically significance in RD2 datasets (p <0.001). In RD1- and RD2-FBP (p <0.001) streak artifacts were noted.
Using SAFIRE the reference mAs in thoracoabdominal CT can be reduced by at least 30% in clinical routine without loss of image quality or diagnostic information.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180302</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28678818</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Abdomen ; Aged ; Algorithms ; Analysis of Variance ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Body mass index ; Cancer ; CAT scans ; Computed tomography ; Conspicuity ; Correlation analysis ; Datasets ; Diagnostic imaging ; Diagnostic systems ; Drug dosages ; Engineering and Technology ; Female ; Gallbladder - diagnostic imaging ; Humans ; Image analysis ; Image processing ; Image quality ; Image reconstruction ; Iterative methods ; Liver - diagnostic imaging ; Longitudinal Studies ; Male ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical imaging ; Medicine ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Men ; Methods ; Middle Aged ; Noise ; Patients ; Prospective Studies ; Qualitative analysis ; Quality ; Quality management ; Radiation ; Radiation dosage ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Radiography, Abdominal - methods ; Radiography, Thoracic - methods ; Radiology ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Sharpness ; Spleen - diagnostic imaging ; Statistical analysis ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2017-07, Vol.12 (7), p.e0180302-e0180302</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2017 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2017 Scharf et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2017 Scharf et al 2017 Scharf et al</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-f42d7094ba32ec644849db17487d677d18079ff9dc6678c7cc315a1d0f1d37583</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-f42d7094ba32ec644849db17487d677d18079ff9dc6678c7cc315a1d0f1d37583</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5498038/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5498038/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2102,2928,23866,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28678818$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Dubois, Ludwig</contributor><creatorcontrib>Scharf, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brendel, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melzer, Katja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hentschke, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>May, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uder, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lell, Michael M</creatorcontrib><title>Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>To step-wise evaluate image quality of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) in reduced-dose (RD) thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) compared to full-dose (FD) and RD filtered back projection (FBP) in a longitudinal study.
122 patients were included in this prospective study. 49 patients (14 men: mean age ± SD, 56±0.4 years; 35 women: 58±1.3 years) completed FD, RD1 (80%-dose) and RD2 (60%-dose) thoracoabdominal CT. Each CT dataset was reconstructed with FBP and SAFIRE. For quantitative image analysis image noise was measured in defined tissue regions. Qualitative image evaluation was performed according to the European Guidelines on Quality criteria for CT. Additionally artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and edge sharpness were assessed.
Compared to FD-FBP noise in soft tissue increased by 12% in RD1-FBP and 27% in RD2-FBP reconstructions, whereas SAFIRE lead to a decrease of 28% (RD1) and 17% (RD2), respectively (all p <0.001). Visually sharp reproduction, lesion conspicuity, edge sharpness of pathologic findings, and overall image quality did not differ statistically significant between FD-FBP and RD-SAFIRE datasets. Image quality decreased in RD1- and RD2-FBP compared to FD-FBP, reaching statistically significance in RD2 datasets (p <0.001). In RD1- and RD2-FBP (p <0.001) streak artifacts were noted.
Using SAFIRE the reference mAs in thoracoabdominal CT can be reduced by at least 30% in clinical routine without loss of image quality or diagnostic information.</description><subject>Abdomen</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Body mass index</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>CAT scans</subject><subject>Computed tomography</subject><subject>Conspicuity</subject><subject>Correlation analysis</subject><subject>Datasets</subject><subject>Diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Diagnostic systems</subject><subject>Drug dosages</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gallbladder - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Image analysis</subject><subject>Image processing</subject><subject>Image quality</subject><subject>Image reconstruction</subject><subject>Iterative methods</subject><subject>Liver - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Longitudinal Studies</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical imaging</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Men</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Noise</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Qualitative analysis</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Quality management</subject><subject>Radiation</subject><subject>Radiation dosage</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</subject><subject>Radiography, Thoracic - methods</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Sharpness</subject><subject>Spleen - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Statistical analysis</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNptUl1r2zAUNWNj7br9g7EJ9tJBk0n-kOyXQgjtFigM2u5Z3OjDUbClVJIL-Xv7ZVMStzSj-EHS1TlH9x6fLPtM8JQUjPxYu8Fb6KYbZ9UUkxoXOH-TnZKmyCc0x8XbF_uT7EMIa4yroqb0fXaS15TVNalPs7-LHlqFHgboTNxeIGmgtS5EIxAIMXgQqQhWoo2LykYDHdLOIw8JGI2zSLqgkFdyEPujsSiuXKI5WErXm9Qhmt9foCEY26I7Y13roUczrY3vlUSLqHwSelToVglnQ_Sj0Pnd7Hpxe_UdRSVW1jwMaqcNqHO2NXGQe-WQNtuP2TsNXVCfxvUs-3N9dT__Nbn5_XMxn91MRNUUcaLLXDLclEsociVoWdZlI5eElTWTlDGZHGSN1o0UNJkjmBAFqYBIrIksWFUXZ9nXg-6mc4GP9gdOGkIrzPKCJsTigJAO1nzjTQ9-yx0Yvi8433LwydpOcaoB50QoipkqhSpB1WzJiMBAq6oWkLQux9eGZTJKJPM9dEeixzfWrHjrHnlVNikLu3bPRwHvknsh8t4EoboOrHLDoe_kR1Pv-v72H_T16UZUC2kAY7VL74qdKJ-VDWMMs4ol1PQVVPqk6k36w0qbVD8ilAeC8C4Er_TzjATzXdKfmuG7pPMx6Yn25aU_z6SnaBf_ADLt_ts</recordid><startdate>20170705</startdate><enddate>20170705</enddate><creator>Scharf, Michael</creator><creator>Brendel, Stephanie</creator><creator>Melzer, Katja</creator><creator>Hentschke, Christian</creator><creator>May, Matthias</creator><creator>Uder, Michael</creator><creator>Lell, Michael M</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170705</creationdate><title>Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study</title><author>Scharf, Michael ; Brendel, Stephanie ; Melzer, Katja ; Hentschke, Christian ; May, Matthias ; Uder, Michael ; Lell, Michael M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c593t-f42d7094ba32ec644849db17487d677d18079ff9dc6678c7cc315a1d0f1d37583</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Abdomen</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Body mass index</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>CAT scans</topic><topic>Computed tomography</topic><topic>Conspicuity</topic><topic>Correlation analysis</topic><topic>Datasets</topic><topic>Diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Diagnostic systems</topic><topic>Drug dosages</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gallbladder - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Image analysis</topic><topic>Image processing</topic><topic>Image quality</topic><topic>Image reconstruction</topic><topic>Iterative methods</topic><topic>Liver - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Longitudinal Studies</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical imaging</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Men</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Noise</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Qualitative analysis</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Quality management</topic><topic>Radiation</topic><topic>Radiation dosage</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</topic><topic>Radiography, Thoracic - methods</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Sharpness</topic><topic>Spleen - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Statistical analysis</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Scharf, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brendel, Stephanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melzer, Katja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hentschke, Christian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>May, Matthias</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uder, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lell, Michael M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Scharf, Michael</au><au>Brendel, Stephanie</au><au>Melzer, Katja</au><au>Hentschke, Christian</au><au>May, Matthias</au><au>Uder, Michael</au><au>Lell, Michael M</au><au>Dubois, Ludwig</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2017-07-05</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>e0180302</spage><epage>e0180302</epage><pages>e0180302-e0180302</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>To step-wise evaluate image quality of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) in reduced-dose (RD) thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT) compared to full-dose (FD) and RD filtered back projection (FBP) in a longitudinal study.
122 patients were included in this prospective study. 49 patients (14 men: mean age ± SD, 56±0.4 years; 35 women: 58±1.3 years) completed FD, RD1 (80%-dose) and RD2 (60%-dose) thoracoabdominal CT. Each CT dataset was reconstructed with FBP and SAFIRE. For quantitative image analysis image noise was measured in defined tissue regions. Qualitative image evaluation was performed according to the European Guidelines on Quality criteria for CT. Additionally artifacts, lesion conspicuity, and edge sharpness were assessed.
Compared to FD-FBP noise in soft tissue increased by 12% in RD1-FBP and 27% in RD2-FBP reconstructions, whereas SAFIRE lead to a decrease of 28% (RD1) and 17% (RD2), respectively (all p <0.001). Visually sharp reproduction, lesion conspicuity, edge sharpness of pathologic findings, and overall image quality did not differ statistically significant between FD-FBP and RD-SAFIRE datasets. Image quality decreased in RD1- and RD2-FBP compared to FD-FBP, reaching statistically significance in RD2 datasets (p <0.001). In RD1- and RD2-FBP (p <0.001) streak artifacts were noted.
Using SAFIRE the reference mAs in thoracoabdominal CT can be reduced by at least 30% in clinical routine without loss of image quality or diagnostic information.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>28678818</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0180302</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2017-07, Vol.12 (7), p.e0180302-e0180302 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_1916507236 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS) Journals Open Access; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Abdomen Aged Algorithms Analysis of Variance Biology and Life Sciences Body mass index Cancer CAT scans Computed tomography Conspicuity Correlation analysis Datasets Diagnostic imaging Diagnostic systems Drug dosages Engineering and Technology Female Gallbladder - diagnostic imaging Humans Image analysis Image processing Image quality Image reconstruction Iterative methods Liver - diagnostic imaging Longitudinal Studies Male Medical diagnosis Medical imaging Medicine Medicine and Health Sciences Men Methods Middle Aged Noise Patients Prospective Studies Qualitative analysis Quality Quality management Radiation Radiation dosage Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiography, Abdominal - methods Radiography, Thoracic - methods Radiology Reproducibility of Results Research and Analysis Methods Sharpness Spleen - diagnostic imaging Statistical analysis Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods |
| title | Image quality, diagnostic accuracy, and potential for radiation dose reduction in thoracoabdominal CT, using Sinogram Affirmed Iterative Reconstruction (SAFIRE) technique in a longitudinal study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T01%3A32%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Image%20quality,%20diagnostic%20accuracy,%20and%20potential%20for%20radiation%20dose%20reduction%20in%20thoracoabdominal%20CT,%20using%20Sinogram%20Affirmed%20Iterative%20Reconstruction%20(SAFIRE)%20technique%20in%20a%20longitudinal%20study&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Scharf,%20Michael&rft.date=2017-07-05&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=e0180302&rft.epage=e0180302&rft.pages=e0180302-e0180302&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0180302&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA497770757%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1916507236&rft_id=info:pmid/28678818&rft_galeid=A497770757&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_6fa021ce607e4ce4ae87b71c0a6558ca&rfr_iscdi=true |