Purpose To evaluate the image quality of an iterative reconstruction algorithm (IRIS) in low-dose chest CT in comparison with standard-dose filtered back projection (FBP) CT. Materials and methods Eighty consecutive patients referred for a follow-up chest CT examination of the chest, underwent a low-dose CT examination (Group 2) in similar technical conditions to those of the initial examination, (Group 1) except for the milliamperage selection and the replacement of regular FBP reconstruction by iterative reconstructions using three (Group 2a) and five iterations (Group 2b). Results Despite a mean decrease of 35.5% in the doselength-product, there was no statistically significant difference between Group 2a and Group 1 in the objective noise, signal-to-noise (SNR) and contrast-to-noise (CNR) ratios and distribution of the overall image quality scores. Compared to Group 1, objective image noise in Group 2b was significantly reduced with increased SNR and CNR and a trend towards improved image quality. Conclusion Iterative reconstructions using three iterations provide similar image quality compared with the conventionally used FBP reconstruction at 35% less dose, thus enabling dose reduction without loss of diagnostic information. According to our preliminary results, even higher dose reductions than 35% may be feasible by using more than three iterations.
Objective To assess noise reduction achievable with an iterative reconstruction algorithm. Methods 32 consecutive chest CT angiograms were reconstructed with regular filtered back projection (FBP) (Group 1) and an iterative reconstruction technique (IRIS) with 3 (Group 2a) and 5 (Group 2b) iterations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.