Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study

Abstract Objectives Evaluate the performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) and compare with filtered-back projection (FBP) regarding radiation dosage and image quality for an 80-kVp abdominal CT. Materials and Methods An abdominal phantom underwent four CT acquisitions and recons...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of radiology 2016-09, Vol.85 (9), p.1666-1672
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Chien-Ming, MD, Lin, Yang-Yu, MD, Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD, Hung, Chien-Fu, MD, Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD, Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1672
container_issue 9
container_start_page 1666
container_title European journal of radiology
container_volume 85
creator Chen, Chien-Ming, MD
Lin, Yang-Yu, MD
Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD
Hung, Chien-Fu, MD
Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD
Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD
description Abstract Objectives Evaluate the performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) and compare with filtered-back projection (FBP) regarding radiation dosage and image quality for an 80-kVp abdominal CT. Materials and Methods An abdominal phantom underwent four CT acquisitions and reconstruction algorithms (FBP; AIDR 3D mild, standard and strong). Sixty-three patients underwent unenhanced liver CT with FBP and standard level AIDR 3D. Further post-acquisition reconstruction with strong level AIDR 3D was made. Patients were divided into two groups (< and ≧29 cm) based on the abdominal effective diameter ( Deff ) at T12 level. Quantitative (attenuation, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio) and qualitative (image quality, noise, sharpness, and artifact) analysis by two readers were assessed and the interobserver agreement was calculated. Results Strong level AIDR 3D reduced radiation dose by 72% in the phantom and 47.1% in the patient study compared with FBP. There was no difference in mean attenuations. Image noise was the lowest and signal-to-noise ratio the highest using strong level AIDR 3D in both patient groups. For Deff < 29 cm, image sharpness of FBP was significantly different from those of AIDR 3D ( P < 0.05). For Deff ≧29 cm, image quality of AIDR 3D was significantly more favorable than FBP ( P < 0.05). Interobserver agreement was substantial. Conclusions Integrated AIDR 3D allows for an automatic reduction in radiation dose and maintenance of image quality compared with FBP. Using AIDR 3D reconstruction, patients with larger abdomen circumference could be imaged at 80 kVp.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.07.002
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1810558842</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0720048X16302121</els_id><sourcerecordid>1810558842</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-bc3d5f24728213ce5a41ed22d8f7364fac3cbae2e970420396448e10c249279b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUl1v0zAUjRCIjcEvQEJ-5CXFdpw6RQKp6hhUGlBt5ePNcuyb1WliZ7Yzqb-dF9x2Q4IXnmzL595z7jk3y14SPCGYTN-0E2i91BOaHhPMJxjTR9kpqTjNOaf8cXaKOcU5ZtXPk-xZCC3GuGQz-jQ7obzEZIbZafZrBb5xvpdWAXINmms5RHMHaBnBy8Pt3AVAV6BHFY2zqDhHSxvhJv2CRj9M3KD5GF2fwAqtxxrQYvQebESfnR47eSgyFl1JbY6PQ0NpNVr28gbQF2f-Ili4fpD-ofeF6ZIS0Hkt1RatvGvhCEuqUYXz7fcBzWvtemNlhxbrt2hu48a7wfXOD5ukabWRNuk7MK6Sgr206zjq3fPsSSO7AC_uz7Ps28WH9eJTfvn143Ixv8wVIyzmtSp02VDGaUVJoaCUjICmVFcNL6askapQtQQKM44ZxcVsylgFBCuazOazujjLXh_7Dt7djhCi6E1Q0HXSghuDIBXBZVlVjCZocYQq70Lw0IjBm176nSBY7FMXrTikLvapC8xFSj1VvbonGOse9J-ah5gT4N0RAGnMOwNeBJV8UKCNT3YK7cx_CN7_U686Y42S3RZ2EFo3-uR-mkQEKrC43i_efu_ItMCUJNd-A_R117Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1810558842</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD ; Lin, Yang-Yu, MD ; Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD ; Hung, Chien-Fu, MD ; Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD ; Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD ; Lin, Yang-Yu, MD ; Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD ; Hung, Chien-Fu, MD ; Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD ; Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objectives Evaluate the performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) and compare with filtered-back projection (FBP) regarding radiation dosage and image quality for an 80-kVp abdominal CT. Materials and Methods An abdominal phantom underwent four CT acquisitions and reconstruction algorithms (FBP; AIDR 3D mild, standard and strong). Sixty-three patients underwent unenhanced liver CT with FBP and standard level AIDR 3D. Further post-acquisition reconstruction with strong level AIDR 3D was made. Patients were divided into two groups (&lt; and ≧29 cm) based on the abdominal effective diameter ( Deff ) at T12 level. Quantitative (attenuation, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio) and qualitative (image quality, noise, sharpness, and artifact) analysis by two readers were assessed and the interobserver agreement was calculated. Results Strong level AIDR 3D reduced radiation dose by 72% in the phantom and 47.1% in the patient study compared with FBP. There was no difference in mean attenuations. Image noise was the lowest and signal-to-noise ratio the highest using strong level AIDR 3D in both patient groups. For Deff &lt; 29 cm, image sharpness of FBP was significantly different from those of AIDR 3D ( P &lt; 0.05). For Deff ≧29 cm, image quality of AIDR 3D was significantly more favorable than FBP ( P &lt; 0.05). Interobserver agreement was substantial. Conclusions Integrated AIDR 3D allows for an automatic reduction in radiation dose and maintenance of image quality compared with FBP. Using AIDR 3D reconstruction, patients with larger abdomen circumference could be imaged at 80 kVp.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0720-048X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1872-7727</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.07.002</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27501904</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Ireland: Elsevier Ireland Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Algorithms ; Body Mass Index ; Female ; Humans ; Imaging ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multidetector computed tomography ; Observer variation ; Phantoms ; Phantoms, Imaging ; Prospective Studies ; Radiation Dosage ; Radiographic image enhancement ; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods ; Radiography, Abdominal - methods ; Radiology ; Radiometry ; Reproducibility of Results ; Signal-To-Noise Ratio ; Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><ispartof>European journal of radiology, 2016-09, Vol.85 (9), p.1666-1672</ispartof><rights>2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-bc3d5f24728213ce5a41ed22d8f7364fac3cbae2e970420396448e10c249279b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-bc3d5f24728213ce5a41ed22d8f7364fac3cbae2e970420396448e10c249279b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9661-5848</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0720048X16302121$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27501904$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yang-Yu, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hung, Chien-Fu, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study</title><title>European journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><description>Abstract Objectives Evaluate the performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) and compare with filtered-back projection (FBP) regarding radiation dosage and image quality for an 80-kVp abdominal CT. Materials and Methods An abdominal phantom underwent four CT acquisitions and reconstruction algorithms (FBP; AIDR 3D mild, standard and strong). Sixty-three patients underwent unenhanced liver CT with FBP and standard level AIDR 3D. Further post-acquisition reconstruction with strong level AIDR 3D was made. Patients were divided into two groups (&lt; and ≧29 cm) based on the abdominal effective diameter ( Deff ) at T12 level. Quantitative (attenuation, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio) and qualitative (image quality, noise, sharpness, and artifact) analysis by two readers were assessed and the interobserver agreement was calculated. Results Strong level AIDR 3D reduced radiation dose by 72% in the phantom and 47.1% in the patient study compared with FBP. There was no difference in mean attenuations. Image noise was the lowest and signal-to-noise ratio the highest using strong level AIDR 3D in both patient groups. For Deff &lt; 29 cm, image sharpness of FBP was significantly different from those of AIDR 3D ( P &lt; 0.05). For Deff ≧29 cm, image quality of AIDR 3D was significantly more favorable than FBP ( P &lt; 0.05). Interobserver agreement was substantial. Conclusions Integrated AIDR 3D allows for an automatic reduction in radiation dose and maintenance of image quality compared with FBP. Using AIDR 3D reconstruction, patients with larger abdomen circumference could be imaged at 80 kVp.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Body Mass Index</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Multidetector computed tomography</subject><subject>Observer variation</subject><subject>Phantoms</subject><subject>Phantoms, Imaging</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Radiation Dosage</subject><subject>Radiographic image enhancement</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</subject><subject>Radiology</subject><subject>Radiometry</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Signal-To-Noise Ratio</subject><subject>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</subject><issn>0720-048X</issn><issn>1872-7727</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUl1v0zAUjRCIjcEvQEJ-5CXFdpw6RQKp6hhUGlBt5ePNcuyb1WliZ7Yzqb-dF9x2Q4IXnmzL595z7jk3y14SPCGYTN-0E2i91BOaHhPMJxjTR9kpqTjNOaf8cXaKOcU5ZtXPk-xZCC3GuGQz-jQ7obzEZIbZafZrBb5xvpdWAXINmms5RHMHaBnBy8Pt3AVAV6BHFY2zqDhHSxvhJv2CRj9M3KD5GF2fwAqtxxrQYvQebESfnR47eSgyFl1JbY6PQ0NpNVr28gbQF2f-Ili4fpD-ofeF6ZIS0Hkt1RatvGvhCEuqUYXz7fcBzWvtemNlhxbrt2hu48a7wfXOD5ukabWRNuk7MK6Sgr206zjq3fPsSSO7AC_uz7Ps28WH9eJTfvn143Ixv8wVIyzmtSp02VDGaUVJoaCUjICmVFcNL6askapQtQQKM44ZxcVsylgFBCuazOazujjLXh_7Dt7djhCi6E1Q0HXSghuDIBXBZVlVjCZocYQq70Lw0IjBm176nSBY7FMXrTikLvapC8xFSj1VvbonGOse9J-ah5gT4N0RAGnMOwNeBJV8UKCNT3YK7cx_CN7_U686Y42S3RZ2EFo3-uR-mkQEKrC43i_efu_ItMCUJNd-A_R117Y</recordid><startdate>20160901</startdate><enddate>20160901</enddate><creator>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD</creator><creator>Lin, Yang-Yu, MD</creator><creator>Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD</creator><creator>Hung, Chien-Fu, MD</creator><creator>Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD</creator><creator>Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</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>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9661-5848</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20160901</creationdate><title>Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study</title><author>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD ; Lin, Yang-Yu, MD ; Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD ; Hung, Chien-Fu, MD ; Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD ; Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c414t-bc3d5f24728213ce5a41ed22d8f7364fac3cbae2e970420396448e10c249279b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Body Mass Index</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Multidetector computed tomography</topic><topic>Observer variation</topic><topic>Phantoms</topic><topic>Phantoms, Imaging</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Radiation Dosage</topic><topic>Radiographic image enhancement</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>Radiography, Abdominal - methods</topic><topic>Radiology</topic><topic>Radiometry</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Signal-To-Noise Ratio</topic><topic>Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lin, Yang-Yu, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hung, Chien-Fu, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</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><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Chien-Ming, MD</au><au>Lin, Yang-Yu, MD</au><au>Hsu, Ming-Yi, MD</au><au>Hung, Chien-Fu, MD</au><au>Liao, Ying-Lan, PhD</au><au>Tsai, Hui-Yu, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study</atitle><jtitle>European journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Radiol</addtitle><date>2016-09-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>85</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1666</spage><epage>1672</epage><pages>1666-1672</pages><issn>0720-048X</issn><eissn>1872-7727</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objectives Evaluate the performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) and compare with filtered-back projection (FBP) regarding radiation dosage and image quality for an 80-kVp abdominal CT. Materials and Methods An abdominal phantom underwent four CT acquisitions and reconstruction algorithms (FBP; AIDR 3D mild, standard and strong). Sixty-three patients underwent unenhanced liver CT with FBP and standard level AIDR 3D. Further post-acquisition reconstruction with strong level AIDR 3D was made. Patients were divided into two groups (&lt; and ≧29 cm) based on the abdominal effective diameter ( Deff ) at T12 level. Quantitative (attenuation, noise, and signal-to-noise ratio) and qualitative (image quality, noise, sharpness, and artifact) analysis by two readers were assessed and the interobserver agreement was calculated. Results Strong level AIDR 3D reduced radiation dose by 72% in the phantom and 47.1% in the patient study compared with FBP. There was no difference in mean attenuations. Image noise was the lowest and signal-to-noise ratio the highest using strong level AIDR 3D in both patient groups. For Deff &lt; 29 cm, image sharpness of FBP was significantly different from those of AIDR 3D ( P &lt; 0.05). For Deff ≧29 cm, image quality of AIDR 3D was significantly more favorable than FBP ( P &lt; 0.05). Interobserver agreement was substantial. Conclusions Integrated AIDR 3D allows for an automatic reduction in radiation dose and maintenance of image quality compared with FBP. Using AIDR 3D reconstruction, patients with larger abdomen circumference could be imaged at 80 kVp.</abstract><cop>Ireland</cop><pub>Elsevier Ireland Ltd</pub><pmid>27501904</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.07.002</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9661-5848</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0720-048X
ispartof European journal of radiology, 2016-09, Vol.85 (9), p.1666-1672
issn 0720-048X
1872-7727
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1810558842
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Aged
Algorithms
Body Mass Index
Female
Humans
Imaging
Imaging, Three-Dimensional
Male
Middle Aged
Multidetector computed tomography
Observer variation
Phantoms
Phantoms, Imaging
Prospective Studies
Radiation Dosage
Radiographic image enhancement
Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods
Radiography, Abdominal - methods
Radiology
Radiometry
Reproducibility of Results
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Tomography, X-Ray Computed - methods
title Performance of Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D Integrated With Automatic Tube Current Modulation in Radiation Dose and Image Noise Reduction Compared With Filtered-back Projection for 80-kVp Abdominal CT: Anthropomorphic Phantom and Patient Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T12%3A27%3A53IST&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%20Adaptive%20Iterative%20Dose%20Reduction%203D%20Integrated%20With%20Automatic%20Tube%20Current%20Modulation%20in%20Radiation%20Dose%20and%20Image%20Noise%20Reduction%20Compared%20With%20Filtered-back%20Projection%20for%2080-kVp%20Abdominal%20CT:%20Anthropomorphic%20Phantom%20and%20Patient%20Study&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Chen,%20Chien-Ming,%20MD&rft.date=2016-09-01&rft.volume=85&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1666&rft.epage=1672&rft.pages=1666-1672&rft.issn=0720-048X&rft.eissn=1872-7727&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejrad.2016.07.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1810558842%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=1810558842&rft_id=info:pmid/27501904&rft_els_id=S0720048X16302121&rfr_iscdi=true