2010
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.10092212
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abdominal CT: Comparison of Adaptive Statistical Iterative and Filtered Back Projection Reconstruction Techniques

Abstract: ASIR lowers noise and improves diagnostic confidence in and conspicuity of subtle abdominal lesions at 8.4 mGy when images are reconstructed with 30% ASIR blending and at 4.2 mGy in patients weighing 90 kg or less when images are reconstructed with 50% or 70% ASIR blending.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

14
246
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 406 publications
(271 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
14
246
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Toshiba had a more coarse noise pattern than GE for the small phantoms tested, which might also support the radiologist's impressions of the images as the Toshiba scanner was installed in the hospital. These findings are also supported by Singh et al (12) …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…Toshiba had a more coarse noise pattern than GE for the small phantoms tested, which might also support the radiologist's impressions of the images as the Toshiba scanner was installed in the hospital. These findings are also supported by Singh et al (12) …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 85%
“…This is true particularly for CT images acquired with a lower dose subjectively assigning radiation saving parameters to a grainier image appearance. Singh et al describe a blotchy pixelated image impression when reporting about abdominal CT images using an adaptive IR technique [13]. The results of our systematic comparison of different levels of IR reflect the daily experience when dealing with IR.…”
mentioning
confidence: 60%
“…The CNR was almost doubled at the highest level of IR when compared to FBP in our measurements. Many studies have been published within the last years reporting on noise reduction and improvement of low-contrast image quality due to IR in CT examinations of the abdomen [13], the thorax [14,15] and the heart [25 -27]. In recent studies by Utsunomiya et al and Laqmani et al, a progressive improvement of the CNR and subjective image quality in cardiac CT and lowdose chest CT was reported when using different levels of IR compared to FBP [28,29].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Next, normalynormal′ is compared with an ideal value estimated by the noise model. This process continues iteratively until the estimated value converges on the ideal value 2 , 3 . The final pixel value Afalse^ can be expressed as: trueA^=argmin{Lfalse(Ax,yfalse)+αGfalse(xfalse)} where αGfalse(xfalse) is a regularization function and L is a cost function.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%