Comparison of radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT using iterative (AIDR 3D) and conventional reconstructions

Caroline Duarte De Mello-Amoedo, Aparecido Nakano Martins, Adriano Tachibana, Daniella Ferraro Pinho, Ronaldo Hueb Baroni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT studies reconstructed with iterative and conventional techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study enrolled 99 patients who underwent abdominopelvic CT examinations with the portal venous phase images reconstructed with both filtered back projection and Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) at different time points. Subjective assessment of image quality was performed by two radiologists who scored axial images for overall quality, sharpness, noise, and acceptability in a blinded fashion. The SD of the mean attenuation of the liver, aorta, and paraspinal muscle (as a measurement of image noise) and contrast-to-noise and signal-to-noise ratios for liver and aorta were used as objective parameters of image quality. Radiation dose parameters included CT dose index volume (CTDIvol), dose-length product, effective dose (ED), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Results were compared for different body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) categories. Paired t test and McNemar paired tests for noninferiority were used, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS. We obtained a 62.5% mean reduction in CTDIvol, a 58% mean reduction in ED, and a 63% mean reduction in SSDE when AIDR 3D was used (p < 0.001). Subjective parameters of image quality were considered noninferior for AIDR 3D studies compared with filtered back projection (p < 0.001), except for the sharpness of images of patients with BMI 20�24.9. Variable results were found regarding objective assessment of image quality. CONCLUSION. AIDR 3D allowed a significant reduction in radiation dose of abdominopelvic CT examinations without a loss of image quality in general.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)127-133
Number of pages7
JournalAmerican Journal of Roentgenology
Volume210
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Radiation
Aorta
Noise
Paraspinal Muscles
Liver
Signal-To-Noise Ratio
Body Mass Index
Retrospective Studies
Weights and Measures
Radiologists

Keywords

  • Adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D
  • CT
  • Iterative reconstruction
  • Radiation dose reduction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

Comparison of radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT using iterative (AIDR 3D) and conventional reconstructions. / De Mello-Amoedo, Caroline Duarte; Martins, Aparecido Nakano; Tachibana, Adriano; Pinho, Daniella Ferraro; Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb.

In: American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 210, No. 1, 01.01.2018, p. 127-133.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

De Mello-Amoedo, Caroline Duarte ; Martins, Aparecido Nakano ; Tachibana, Adriano ; Pinho, Daniella Ferraro ; Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb. / Comparison of radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT using iterative (AIDR 3D) and conventional reconstructions. In: American Journal of Roentgenology. 2018 ; Vol. 210, No. 1. pp. 127-133.
@article{7698def5541d43f190a0bbaabd3d1922,
title = "Comparison of radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT using iterative (AIDR 3D) and conventional reconstructions",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT studies reconstructed with iterative and conventional techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study enrolled 99 patients who underwent abdominopelvic CT examinations with the portal venous phase images reconstructed with both filtered back projection and Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) at different time points. Subjective assessment of image quality was performed by two radiologists who scored axial images for overall quality, sharpness, noise, and acceptability in a blinded fashion. The SD of the mean attenuation of the liver, aorta, and paraspinal muscle (as a measurement of image noise) and contrast-to-noise and signal-to-noise ratios for liver and aorta were used as objective parameters of image quality. Radiation dose parameters included CT dose index volume (CTDIvol), dose-length product, effective dose (ED), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Results were compared for different body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) categories. Paired t test and McNemar paired tests for noninferiority were used, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS. We obtained a 62.5{\%} mean reduction in CTDIvol, a 58{\%} mean reduction in ED, and a 63{\%} mean reduction in SSDE when AIDR 3D was used (p < 0.001). Subjective parameters of image quality were considered noninferior for AIDR 3D studies compared with filtered back projection (p < 0.001), except for the sharpness of images of patients with BMI 20�24.9. Variable results were found regarding objective assessment of image quality. CONCLUSION. AIDR 3D allowed a significant reduction in radiation dose of abdominopelvic CT examinations without a loss of image quality in general.",
keywords = "Adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D, CT, Iterative reconstruction, Radiation dose reduction",
author = "{De Mello-Amoedo}, {Caroline Duarte} and Martins, {Aparecido Nakano} and Adriano Tachibana and Pinho, {Daniella Ferraro} and Baroni, {Ronaldo Hueb}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2214/AJR.17.18025",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "210",
pages = "127--133",
journal = "American Journal of Roentgenology",
issn = "0361-803X",
publisher = "American Roentgen Ray Society",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT using iterative (AIDR 3D) and conventional reconstructions

AU - De Mello-Amoedo, Caroline Duarte

AU - Martins, Aparecido Nakano

AU - Tachibana, Adriano

AU - Pinho, Daniella Ferraro

AU - Baroni, Ronaldo Hueb

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT studies reconstructed with iterative and conventional techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study enrolled 99 patients who underwent abdominopelvic CT examinations with the portal venous phase images reconstructed with both filtered back projection and Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) at different time points. Subjective assessment of image quality was performed by two radiologists who scored axial images for overall quality, sharpness, noise, and acceptability in a blinded fashion. The SD of the mean attenuation of the liver, aorta, and paraspinal muscle (as a measurement of image noise) and contrast-to-noise and signal-to-noise ratios for liver and aorta were used as objective parameters of image quality. Radiation dose parameters included CT dose index volume (CTDIvol), dose-length product, effective dose (ED), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Results were compared for different body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) categories. Paired t test and McNemar paired tests for noninferiority were used, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS. We obtained a 62.5% mean reduction in CTDIvol, a 58% mean reduction in ED, and a 63% mean reduction in SSDE when AIDR 3D was used (p < 0.001). Subjective parameters of image quality were considered noninferior for AIDR 3D studies compared with filtered back projection (p < 0.001), except for the sharpness of images of patients with BMI 20�24.9. Variable results were found regarding objective assessment of image quality. CONCLUSION. AIDR 3D allowed a significant reduction in radiation dose of abdominopelvic CT examinations without a loss of image quality in general.

AB - OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study is to compare radiation dose and image quality of abdominopelvic CT studies reconstructed with iterative and conventional techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study enrolled 99 patients who underwent abdominopelvic CT examinations with the portal venous phase images reconstructed with both filtered back projection and Adaptive Iterative Dose Reduction 3D (AIDR 3D) at different time points. Subjective assessment of image quality was performed by two radiologists who scored axial images for overall quality, sharpness, noise, and acceptability in a blinded fashion. The SD of the mean attenuation of the liver, aorta, and paraspinal muscle (as a measurement of image noise) and contrast-to-noise and signal-to-noise ratios for liver and aorta were used as objective parameters of image quality. Radiation dose parameters included CT dose index volume (CTDIvol), dose-length product, effective dose (ED), and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE). Results were compared for different body mass index (BMI; weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters) categories. Paired t test and McNemar paired tests for noninferiority were used, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. RESULTS. We obtained a 62.5% mean reduction in CTDIvol, a 58% mean reduction in ED, and a 63% mean reduction in SSDE when AIDR 3D was used (p < 0.001). Subjective parameters of image quality were considered noninferior for AIDR 3D studies compared with filtered back projection (p < 0.001), except for the sharpness of images of patients with BMI 20�24.9. Variable results were found regarding objective assessment of image quality. CONCLUSION. AIDR 3D allowed a significant reduction in radiation dose of abdominopelvic CT examinations without a loss of image quality in general.

KW - Adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D

KW - CT

KW - Iterative reconstruction

KW - Radiation dose reduction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85039164434&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85039164434&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2214/AJR.17.18025

DO - 10.2214/AJR.17.18025

M3 - Article

C2 - 29140117

AN - SCOPUS:85039164434

VL - 210

SP - 127

EP - 133

JO - American Journal of Roentgenology

JF - American Journal of Roentgenology

SN - 0361-803X

IS - 1

ER -