Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Feasibility Study of Radiation Dose Reduction in Adult Female Pelvic CT Scan with Low Tube-Voltage and Adaptive Statistical Iterative Reconstruction

  • Wang, Xinlian (Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University) ;
  • He, Wen (Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University) ;
  • Chen, Jianghong (Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University) ;
  • Hu, Zhihai (Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University) ;
  • Zhao, Liqin (Department of Radiology, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University)
  • Received : 2014.12.18
  • Accepted : 2015.05.21
  • Published : 2015.09.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate image quality of female pelvic computed tomography (CT) scans reconstructed with the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) technique combined with low tube-voltage and to explore the feasibility of its clinical application. Materials and Methods: Ninety-four patients were divided into two groups. The study group used 100 kVp, and images were reconstructed with 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% ASIR. The control group used 120 kVp, and images were reconstructed with 30% ASIR. The noise index was 15 for the study group and 11 for the control group. The CT values and noise levels of different tissues were measured. The contrast to noise ratio (CNR) was calculated. A subjective evaluation was carried out by two experienced radiologists. The CT dose index volume (CTDIvol) was recorded. Results: A 44.7% reduction in CTDIvol was observed in the study group ($8.18{\pm}3.58mGy$) compared with that in the control group ($14.78{\pm}6.15mGy$). No significant differences were observed in the tissue noise levels and CNR values between the 70% ASIR group and the control group (p = 0.068-1.000). The subjective scores indicated that visibility of small structures, diagnostic confidence, and the overall image quality score in the 70% ASIR group was the best, and were similar to those in the control group (1.87 vs. 1.79, 1.26 vs. 1.28, and 4.53 vs. 4.57; p = 0.122-0.585). No significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was detected between the study group and the control group (42/47 vs. 43/47, p = 1.000). Conclusion: Low tube-voltage combined with automatic tube current modulation and 70% ASIR allowed the low CT radiation dose to be reduced by 44.7% without losing image quality on female pelvic scan.

Keywords

References

  1. Chen JH, Jin EH, He W, Zhao LQ. Combining automatic tube current modulation with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction for low-dose chest CT screening. PLoS One 2014;9:e92414 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092414
  2. Shin HJ, Chung YE, Lee YH, Choi JY, Park MS, Kim MJ, et al. Radiation dose reduction via sinogram affirmed iterative reconstruction and automatic tube voltage modulation (CARE kV) in abdominal CT. Korean J Radiol 2013;14:886-893 https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2013.14.6.886
  3. Pickhardt PJ, Lubner MG, Kim DH, Tang J, Ruma JA, del Rio AM, et al. Abdominal CT with model-based iterative reconstruction (MBIR): initial results of a prospective trial comparing ultralow-dose with standard-dose imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;199:1266-1274 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.9382
  4. McCollough CH, Primak AN, Braun N, Kofler J, Yu L, Christner J. Strategies for reducing radiation dose in CT. Radiol Clin North Am 2009;47:27-40 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2008.10.006
  5. Kalra MK, Maher MM, Toth TL, Hamberg LM, Blake MA, Shepard JA, et al. Strategies for CT radiation dose optimization. Radiology 2004;230:619-628 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2303021726
  6. Marin D, Nelson RC, Schindera ST, Richard S, Youngblood RS, Yoshizumi TT, et al. Low-tube-voltage, high-tube-current multidetector abdominal CT: improved image quality and decreased radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm--initial clinical experience. Radiology 2010;254:145-153 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09090094
  7. Yu MH, Lee JM, Yoon JH, Baek JH, Han JK, Choi BI, et al. Low tube voltage intermediate tube current liver MDCT: sinogramaffirmed iterative reconstruction algorithm for detection of hypervascular hepatocellular carcinoma. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;201:23-32 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.12.10000
  8. Hara AK, Paden RG, Silva AC, Kujak JL, Lawder HJ, Pavlicek W. Iterative reconstruction technique for reducing body radiation dose at CT: feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193:764-771 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2397
  9. Martinsen AC, Sæther HK, Hol PK, Olsen DR, Skaane P. Iterative reconstruction reduces abdominal CT dose. Eur J Radiol 2012;81:1483-1487 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2011.04.021
  10. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Digumarthy SR, Hsieh J, Pien H, Singh S, et al. Radiation dose reduction with chest computed tomography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique: initial experience. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2010;34:40-45 https://doi.org/10.1097/RCT.0b013e3181b26c67
  11. Prakash P, Kalra MK, Kambadakone AK, Pien H, Hsieh J, Blake MA, et al. Reducing abdominal CT radiation dose with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique. Invest Radiol 2010;45:202-210 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.ob013e3181dzfeec
  12. Silva AC, Lawder HJ, Hara A, Kujak J, Pavlicek W. Innovations in CT dose reduction strategy: application of the adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction algorithm. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:191-199 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2953
  13. Singh S, Kalra MK, Gilman MD, Hsieh J, Pien HH, Digumarthy SR, et al. Adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction technique for radiation dose reduction in chest CT: a pilot study. Radiology 2011;259:565-573 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11101450
  14. Lin XZ, Machida H, Tanaka I, Fukui R, Ueno E, Chen KM, et al. CT of the pancreas: comparison of image quality and pancreatic duct depiction among model-based iterative, adaptive statistical iterative, and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Abdom Imaging 2014;39:497-505 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0081-5
  15. Sagara Y, Hara AK, Pavlicek W, Silva AC, Paden RG, Wu Q. Abdominal CT: comparison of low-dose CT with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction and routine-dose CT with filtered back projection in 53 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:713-719 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.2989
  16. Kalra MK, Prasad S, Saini S, Blake MA, Varghese J, Halpern EF, et al. Clinical comparison of standard-dose and 50% reduced-dose abdominal CT: effect on image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;179:1101-1106 https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.179.5.1791101
  17. Singh S, Kalra MK, Moore MA, Shailam R, Liu B, Toth TL, et al. Dose reduction and compliance with pediatric CT protocols adapted to patient size, clinical indication, and number of prior studies. Radiology 2009;252:200-208 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2521081554
  18. EUR 16262. European guidelines on quality criteria for computed tomography. http://www.drs.dk/guidelines/ct/quality/download/eur16262.w51
  19. Kondo H, Kanematsu M, Goshima S, Tomita Y, Kim MJ, Moriyama N, et al. Body size indexes for optimizing iodine dose for aortic and hepatic enhancement at multidetector CT: comparison of total body weight, lean body weight, and blood volume. Radiology 2010;254:163-169 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09090369
  20. Schindera ST, Diedrichsen L, Müller HC, Rusch O, Marin D, Schmidt B, et al. Iterative reconstruction algorithm for abdominal multidetector CT at different tube voltages: assessment of diagnostic accuracy, image quality, and radiation dose in a phantom study. Radiology 2011;260:454-462 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11102217
  21. Gervaise A, Osemont B, Louis M, Lecocq S, Teixeira P, Blum A. Standard dose versus low-dose abdominal and pelvic CT: comparison between filtered back projection versus adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D. Diagn Interv Imaging 2014;95:47-53 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diii.2013.05.005
  22. Kaza RK, Platt JF, Al-Hawary MM, Wasnik A, Liu PS, Pandya A. CT enterography at 80 kVp with adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction versus at 120 kVp with standard reconstruction: image quality, diagnostic adequacy, and dose reduction. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2012;198:1084-1092 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.6597
  23. Vardhanabhuti V, Riordan RD, Mitchell GR, Hyde C, Roobottom CA. Image comparative assessment using iterative reconstructions: clinical comparison of low-dose abdominal/ pelvic computed tomography between adaptive statistical, model-based iterative reconstructions and traditional filtered back projection in 65 patients. Invest Radiol 2014;49:209-216 https://doi.org/10.1097/RLI.0000000000000017
  24. Singh S, Kalra MK, Hsieh J, Licato PE, Do S, Pien HH, et al. Abdominal CT: comparison of adaptive statistical iterative and filtered back projection reconstruction techniques. Radiology 2010;257:373-383 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10092212
  25. Flicek KT, Hara AK, Silva AC, Wu Q, Peter MB, Johnson CD. Reducing the radiation dose for CT colonography using adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction: a pilot study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;195:126-131 https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.09.3855
  26. Thibault JB, Sauer KD, Bouman CA, Hsieh J. A threedimensional statistical approach to improved image quality for multislice helical CT. Med Phys 2007;34:4526-4544 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2789499
  27. Xu J, Mahesh M, Tsui BM. Is iterative reconstruction ready for MDCT? J Am Coll Radiol 2009;6:274-276 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacr.2008.12.014
  28. Tang K, Wang L, Li R, Lin J, Zheng X, Cao G. Effect of low tube voltage on image quality, radiation dose, and low-contrast detectability at abdominal multidetector CT: phantom study. J Biomed Biotechnol 2012;2012:130169

Cited by

  1. Low-Tube-Voltage CT Urography Using Low-Concentration-Iodine Contrast Media and Iterative Reconstruction: A Multi-Institutional Randomized Controlled Trial for Comparison with Conventional CT Urograph vol.19, pp.6, 2018, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2018.19.6.1119
  2. Sparsity-induced dynamic guided filtering approach for sparse-view data toward low-dose x-ray computed tomography vol.63, pp.23, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/aaeea6
  3. The impact of adaptive iterative dose reduction 3D on the improvement of shoulder image quality in head and neck CTA vol.35, pp.5, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2018.1541446