File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1007/s13244-013-0273-5
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84884559428
- WOS: WOS:000215413000016
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi
Title | Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Computed tomography Image enhancement Image processing Urolithiasis |
Issue Date | 2013 |
Citation | Insights into Imaging, 2013, v. 4 n. 5, p. 661-669 How to Cite? |
Abstract | Objectives: To compare image quality on computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques in CT kidney/ureter/bladder (KUB) examination. Methods: Eighteen patients underwent standard protocol CT KUB at our institution. The same raw data were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Objective [mean image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for kidney and mean attenuation values of subcutaneous fat] and subjective image parameters (image noise, image contrast, overall visibility of kidneys/ureters/bladder, visibility of small structures, and overall diagnostic confidence) were assessed using a scoring system from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Results: Objective image measurements revealed significantly less image noise and higher CNR and the same fat attenuation values for the MBIR technique (P < 0.05). MBIR scored best in all the subjective image parameters (P < 0.001) with averages ranging between 2.05-2.73 for MBIR, 2.95-3.10 for ASIR and 3.08-3.31 for FBP. No significant difference was observed between FBP and ASIR (P > 0.05), while there was a significant difference between ASIR vs. MBIR (P < 0.05). The mean effective dose was 3 mSv. Conclusion: MBIR shows superior reduction in noise and improved image quality (both objective and subjective analysis) compared with ASIR and FBP CT KUB examinations. Main Messages: • There are many reconstruction options in CT. • Novel model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) showed the least noise and optimal image quality. • For CT of the kidneys/ureters/bladder, MBIR should be utilised, if available. • Further studies to reduce the dose while maintaining image quality should be pursued. © 2013 The Author(s). |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/197957 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 4.1 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.240 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Vardhanabhuti, V | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ilyas, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Gutteridge, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Freeman, SJ | - |
dc.contributor.author | Roobottom, CA | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2014-06-16T03:40:04Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2014-06-16T03:40:04Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Insights into Imaging, 2013, v. 4 n. 5, p. 661-669 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1869-4101 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/197957 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objectives: To compare image quality on computed tomographic (CT) images acquired with filtered back-projection (FBP), adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) techniques in CT kidney/ureter/bladder (KUB) examination. Methods: Eighteen patients underwent standard protocol CT KUB at our institution. The same raw data were reconstructed using FBP, ASIR and MBIR. Objective [mean image noise, contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) for kidney and mean attenuation values of subcutaneous fat] and subjective image parameters (image noise, image contrast, overall visibility of kidneys/ureters/bladder, visibility of small structures, and overall diagnostic confidence) were assessed using a scoring system from 1 (best) to 5 (worst). Results: Objective image measurements revealed significantly less image noise and higher CNR and the same fat attenuation values for the MBIR technique (P < 0.05). MBIR scored best in all the subjective image parameters (P < 0.001) with averages ranging between 2.05-2.73 for MBIR, 2.95-3.10 for ASIR and 3.08-3.31 for FBP. No significant difference was observed between FBP and ASIR (P > 0.05), while there was a significant difference between ASIR vs. MBIR (P < 0.05). The mean effective dose was 3 mSv. Conclusion: MBIR shows superior reduction in noise and improved image quality (both objective and subjective analysis) compared with ASIR and FBP CT KUB examinations. Main Messages: • There are many reconstruction options in CT. • Novel model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR) showed the least noise and optimal image quality. • For CT of the kidneys/ureters/bladder, MBIR should be utilised, if available. • Further studies to reduce the dose while maintaining image quality should be pursued. © 2013 The Author(s). | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Insights into Imaging | - |
dc.subject | Computed tomography | - |
dc.subject | Image enhancement | - |
dc.subject | Image processing | - |
dc.subject | Urolithiasis | - |
dc.title | Comparison of image quality between filtered back-projection and the adaptive statistical and novel model-based iterative reconstruction techniques in abdominal CT for renal calculi | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s13244-013-0273-5 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84884559428 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 4 | - |
dc.identifier.issue | 5 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 661 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 669 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000215413000016 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1869-4101 | - |