Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans
To study the impact of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and concurrent application of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on image quality (IQ) and radiation dose. A phantom was scanned using various computed tomography (CT) parameters (kV, 80-120; mAs, 50-200). Abdomen contra...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of computer assisted tomography 2013-11, Vol.37 (6), p.897-903 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 903 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 897 |
| container_title | Journal of computer assisted tomography |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Desai, Gaurav S Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M Kambadakone, Avinash R Sahani, Dushyant V |
| description | To study the impact of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and concurrent application of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on image quality (IQ) and radiation dose.
A phantom was scanned using various computed tomography (CT) parameters (kV, 80-120; mAs, 50-200). Abdomen contrast-enhanced CT (CECTs) in 170 adults were performed using dose-modified protocols: in 145 patients (group I), ATVS was applied (mAs, 111-649); in 25 (group II), the kV was fixed at 120 (reference mAs, 150). In 95 patients, standard-dose (SD) scan was available. Two readers evaluated the IQ of filtered back projection (FBP) and SAFIRE (levels 1, 3, and 5) images.
In phantom, nonlinear drop in noise with increasing strengths of IR (levels S1-S5) was noted. The dose-modified IR scan was rated diagnostic in all 170 patients, with IQ score comparable to that of SD-FBP (P = 0.3). Lower kV (100/80) was prescribed by ATVS in 70% examinations in group I. In comparison with SD-FBP, the mean dose in CT dose index in group I (IR, 3.2 mGy; SD-FBP, 13.02 mGy; P < 0.0001) and in group II (IR, 4.8 mGy; SD-FBP, 11.8 mGy; P < 0.001) was 75.4% and 59.3% lower.
Use of SAFIRE and ATVS provides diagnostic quality images at 59.3% to 75.4% reduced dose compared with SD-FBP scan. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182a73fa6 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1618151998</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1618151998</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-4bda70ef2afa49e9b42eb24d30b9c3d6be166535ab4258f924e65d43078e164b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkc9q3DAQxkVpaTZ_3iAUHXPxViPJsn0MS9oGAglhezYja9w62FYiyYG8Qp-62t00h1wKAwPz_b4ZmI-xcxBrEE319X6zXQsrQJGCWmKlejQf2ApKJQsFuvzIVkIZVdQVlEfsOMYHIaBSSn9mR1LLSgDAiv25o9D7MOHcEfc9HxIFTMMz8UCdn2MKS5cGP3OcHccl-QkTOZ4WS_zZjwl_EY800gHKlX4TH6bd-GnBcUgve2dAN-AecT5mIO-zzk_DjCPfbHnscI6n7FOPY6Sz137Cfn672m5-FDe33683lzdFp4VJhbYOK0G9xB51Q43VkqzUTgnbdMoZS2BMqUrMQln3jdRkSqeVqOqsaKtO2MVh72PwTwvF1E5D7GgccSa_xBYM1FBC09T_R3VmK2UamVF9QLvgYwzUt48h_yG8tCDaXWBtDqx9H1i2fXm9sNiJ3JvpX0LqL8FwlPk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1461873692</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Desai, Gaurav S ; Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M ; Kambadakone, Avinash R ; Sahani, Dushyant V</creator><creatorcontrib>Desai, Gaurav S ; Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M ; Kambadakone, Avinash R ; Sahani, Dushyant V</creatorcontrib><description>To study the impact of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and concurrent application of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on image quality (IQ) and radiation dose.
A phantom was scanned using various computed tomography (CT) parameters (kV, 80-120; mAs, 50-200). Abdomen contrast-enhanced CT (CECTs) in 170 adults were performed using dose-modified protocols: in 145 patients (group I), ATVS was applied (mAs, 111-649); in 25 (group II), the kV was fixed at 120 (reference mAs, 150). In 95 patients, standard-dose (SD) scan was available. Two readers evaluated the IQ of filtered back projection (FBP) and SAFIRE (levels 1, 3, and 5) images.
In phantom, nonlinear drop in noise with increasing strengths of IR (levels S1-S5) was noted. The dose-modified IR scan was rated diagnostic in all 170 patients, with IQ score comparable to that of SD-FBP (P = 0.3). Lower kV (100/80) was prescribed by ATVS in 70% examinations in group I. In comparison with SD-FBP, the mean dose in CT dose index in group I (IR, 3.2 mGy; SD-FBP, 13.02 mGy; P < 0.0001) and in group II (IR, 4.8 mGy; SD-FBP, 11.8 mGy; P < 0.001) was 75.4% and 59.3% lower.
Use of SAFIRE and ATVS provides diagnostic quality images at 59.3% to 75.4% reduced dose compared with SD-FBP scan.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0363-8715</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-3145</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182a73fa6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24270111</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Body Burden ; Humans ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Radiation Dosage ; Radiation Protection - methods ; Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Radiography, Abdominal - methods ; Radiometry ; Reproducibility of Results ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of computer assisted tomography, 2013-11, Vol.37 (6), p.897-903</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-4bda70ef2afa49e9b42eb24d30b9c3d6be166535ab4258f924e65d43078e164b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-4bda70ef2afa49e9b42eb24d30b9c3d6be166535ab4258f924e65d43078e164b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24270111$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Desai, Gaurav S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kambadakone, Avinash R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahani, Dushyant V</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans</title><title>Journal of computer assisted tomography</title><addtitle>J Comput Assist Tomogr</addtitle><description>To study the impact of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and concurrent application of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on image quality (IQ) and radiation dose.
A phantom was scanned using various computed tomography (CT) parameters (kV, 80-120; mAs, 50-200). Abdomen contrast-enhanced CT (CECTs) in 170 adults were performed using dose-modified protocols: in 145 patients (group I), ATVS was applied (mAs, 111-649); in 25 (group II), the kV was fixed at 120 (reference mAs, 150). In 95 patients, standard-dose (SD) scan was available. Two readers evaluated the IQ of filtered back projection (FBP) and SAFIRE (levels 1, 3, and 5) images.
In phantom, nonlinear drop in noise with increasing strengths of IR (levels S1-S5) was noted. The dose-modified IR scan was rated diagnostic in all 170 patients, with IQ score comparable to that of SD-FBP (P = 0.3). Lower kV (100/80) was prescribed by ATVS in 70% examinations in group I. In comparison with SD-FBP, the mean dose in CT dose index in group I (IR, 3.2 mGy; SD-FBP, 13.02 mGy; P < 0.0001) and in group II (IR, 4.8 mGy; SD-FBP, 11.8 mGy; P < 0.001) was 75.4% and 59.3% lower.
Use of SAFIRE and ATVS provides diagnostic quality images at 59.3% to 75.4% reduced dose compared with SD-FBP scan.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Body Burden</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Radiation Dosage</subject><subject>Radiation Protection - methods</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</subject><subject>Radiometry</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Sensitivity and Specificity</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>0363-8715</issn><issn>1532-3145</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkc9q3DAQxkVpaTZ_3iAUHXPxViPJsn0MS9oGAglhezYja9w62FYiyYG8Qp-62t00h1wKAwPz_b4ZmI-xcxBrEE319X6zXQsrQJGCWmKlejQf2ApKJQsFuvzIVkIZVdQVlEfsOMYHIaBSSn9mR1LLSgDAiv25o9D7MOHcEfc9HxIFTMMz8UCdn2MKS5cGP3OcHccl-QkTOZ4WS_zZjwl_EY800gHKlX4TH6bd-GnBcUgve2dAN-AecT5mIO-zzk_DjCPfbHnscI6n7FOPY6Sz137Cfn672m5-FDe33683lzdFp4VJhbYOK0G9xB51Q43VkqzUTgnbdMoZS2BMqUrMQln3jdRkSqeVqOqsaKtO2MVh72PwTwvF1E5D7GgccSa_xBYM1FBC09T_R3VmK2UamVF9QLvgYwzUt48h_yG8tCDaXWBtDqx9H1i2fXm9sNiJ3JvpX0LqL8FwlPk</recordid><startdate>20131101</startdate><enddate>20131101</enddate><creator>Desai, Gaurav S</creator><creator>Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M</creator><creator>Kambadakone, Avinash R</creator><creator>Sahani, Dushyant V</creator><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>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131101</creationdate><title>Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans</title><author>Desai, Gaurav S ; Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M ; Kambadakone, Avinash R ; Sahani, Dushyant V</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-4bda70ef2afa49e9b42eb24d30b9c3d6be166535ab4258f924e65d43078e164b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Body Burden</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Radiation Dosage</topic><topic>Radiation Protection - methods</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</topic><topic>Radiometry</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Sensitivity and Specificity</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Desai, Gaurav S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kambadakone, Avinash R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sahani, Dushyant V</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of computer assisted tomography</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Desai, Gaurav S</au><au>Fuentes Orrego, Jorge M</au><au>Kambadakone, Avinash R</au><au>Sahani, Dushyant V</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans</atitle><jtitle>Journal of computer assisted tomography</jtitle><addtitle>J Comput Assist Tomogr</addtitle><date>2013-11-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>897</spage><epage>903</epage><pages>897-903</pages><issn>0363-8715</issn><eissn>1532-3145</eissn><abstract>To study the impact of sinogram-affirmed iterative reconstruction (SAFIRE) and concurrent application of automated tube voltage selection (ATVS) on image quality (IQ) and radiation dose.
A phantom was scanned using various computed tomography (CT) parameters (kV, 80-120; mAs, 50-200). Abdomen contrast-enhanced CT (CECTs) in 170 adults were performed using dose-modified protocols: in 145 patients (group I), ATVS was applied (mAs, 111-649); in 25 (group II), the kV was fixed at 120 (reference mAs, 150). In 95 patients, standard-dose (SD) scan was available. Two readers evaluated the IQ of filtered back projection (FBP) and SAFIRE (levels 1, 3, and 5) images.
In phantom, nonlinear drop in noise with increasing strengths of IR (levels S1-S5) was noted. The dose-modified IR scan was rated diagnostic in all 170 patients, with IQ score comparable to that of SD-FBP (P = 0.3). Lower kV (100/80) was prescribed by ATVS in 70% examinations in group I. In comparison with SD-FBP, the mean dose in CT dose index in group I (IR, 3.2 mGy; SD-FBP, 13.02 mGy; P < 0.0001) and in group II (IR, 4.8 mGy; SD-FBP, 11.8 mGy; P < 0.001) was 75.4% and 59.3% lower.
Use of SAFIRE and ATVS provides diagnostic quality images at 59.3% to 75.4% reduced dose compared with SD-FBP scan.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>24270111</pmid><doi>10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182a73fa6</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0363-8715 |
| ispartof | Journal of computer assisted tomography, 2013-11, Vol.37 (6), p.897-903 |
| issn | 0363-8715 1532-3145 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1618151998 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Algorithms Body Burden Humans Phantoms, Imaging Radiation Dosage Radiation Protection - methods Radiographic Image Enhancement - methods Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods Radiography, Abdominal - methods Radiometry Reproducibility of Results Sensitivity and Specificity Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods |
| title | Performance of iterative reconstruction and automated tube voltage selection on the image quality and radiation dose in abdominal CT scans |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T09%3A32%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Performance%20of%20iterative%20reconstruction%20and%20automated%20tube%20voltage%20selection%20on%20the%20image%20quality%20and%20radiation%20dose%20in%20abdominal%20CT%20scans&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20computer%20assisted%20tomography&rft.au=Desai,%20Gaurav%20S&rft.date=2013-11-01&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=897&rft.epage=903&rft.pages=897-903&rft.issn=0363-8715&rft.eissn=1532-3145&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/RCT.0b013e3182a73fa6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1618151998%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1461873692&rft_id=info:pmid/24270111&rfr_iscdi=true |