Adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) 3D in low dose CT abdomen-pelvis: Effects on image quality and radiation exposure

Ang, W. C.; Hashim, Suhairul; Karim, Muhammad Khalis Abdul; Bahruddin, N. A.; Salehhon, N.; Musa, Y.

doi:10.1088/1742-6596/851/1/012006

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Automated noise calculation must be able to distinguish noise magnitude for different input parameters. Our proposed algorithm is able to distinguish the noise magnitude due to variations in tube currents and different levels of noise suppression in a reconstructed image using the AIDR 3D algorithm, as reported previously by Ang et al [30] using the manual method. There is a linear correlation between the noise calculated automatically using our proposed algorithm and the previous algorithm [20] for homogeneous phantoms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

An Improved Method of Automated Noise Measurement System in CT Images

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: It is necessary to have an automated noise measurement system working accurately to optimize dose in computerized tomography (CT) examinations.Objective: This study aims to develop an algorithm to automate noise measurement that can be implemented in CT images of all body regions. Materials and Methods:In this retrospective study, our automated noise measurement method consists of three steps as follows: the first is segmenting the image of the patient. The second is developing a standard deviation (SD) map by calculating the SD value for each pixel with a sliding window operation. The third step is estimating the noise as the smallest SD from the SD map. The proposed method was applied to the images of a homogenous phantom and a full body adult anthropomorphic phantom, and retrospectively applied to 27 abdominal images of patients.Results: For a homogeneous phantom, the noises calculated using our proposed and previous algorithms have a linear correlation with R 2 = 0.997. It is found that the noise magnitude closely follows the magnitude of the water equivalent diameter (D w ) in all body regions. The proposed algorithm is able to distinguish the noise magnitude due to variations in tube currents and different noise suppression techniques such as strong, standard, mild, and weak ones in a reconstructed image using the AIDR 3D algorithm. Conclusion: An automated noise calculation has been proposed and successfullyimplemented in all body regions. It is not only accurate and easy to implement but also not influenced by the subjectivity of user.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

An Improved Method of Automated Noise Measurement System in CT Images

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The tube current indicated in Table 4 showed a similar trend in various studies. Most studies applied the AEC system to modulate the tube current and reduce unnecessary radiation exposure to their subjects [16][17][18][19][20]. However, the variation in pitch factor and beam collimation showed different approaches taken by various institutions in utilizing their CT-Scanner.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radiation Doses and Cancer Risk from CT Pulmonary Angiography Examinations

Harun¹,

Karim²,

Abbas³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study aims to investigate radiation doses from Computed Tomography Pulmonary Angiography (CTPA) examinations based on the patient’s size and to estimate the probability of cancer risk induced from the examination. Data from 100 patients who had undergone CTPA examinations, such as scanning acquisition parameters, patient demography, as well as radiation dose exposure, were collected and analysed. All subjects which aged above 18 y/o were scanned using a Philips Brilliance 128 multi-detector CT (MDCT) scanner. The mean dose value for Volume Computed Tomography Dose Index (CTDIvol), Dose-Length Product (DLP) and effective dose (E) were 11.06 ± 7.17 mGy, 400.38 ± 259.10 mGy.cm and 8.68 ± 5.47 mSv respectively. In addition, with respective of patient’s effective diameter, the mean SSDE value for Group 1, Group 2 and Group 3 were 9.93 ± 3.89, 13.70 ± 9.04 and 22.29 ± 7.35, respectively. Cancer risk per million procedure was calculated based on te recommendation by the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 103 report. The organ dose and cancer risk attained for breast, lung and liver were 17.05 ± 10.40 mGy (194 per one million procedure), 17.55 ± 10.86 mGy (192 per one million procedure) and 15.04 ± 9.75 mGy (53 per one million procedure), respectively. In conclusion, CTDIvol underestimated, and SSDE was more accurate in describing the radiation dose. Lung and breast with larger lung effective diameter received the highest dose exposure which increase the probability of the cancer risk. Therefore, it is important to apply optimised protocols in order to reduce patient’s exposure during CTPA examination.

show abstract

“…Various strategies have been developed to further reduce the radiation dose, including low kVp, automated exposure control, and iterative reconstruction (IR) [1,2]. Automatic tube current modulation (ATCM) can allow a reduction in the radiation exposure during CT examination, which is also affected by the patient's size [3,4]. Currently, 80 kVp is feasible and increasingly used as the optimal radiation dose [5][6][7][8]; however, although using a low kVp reduces the radiation dose, it increases the image noise [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual-source abdominopelvic computed tomography: Comparison of image quality and radiation dose of 80 kVp and 80/150 kVp with tin filter

Choi

Ahn

Pak³

et al. 2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To compare the radiation dose and the objective and subjective image quality of 80 kVp and 80/150 kVp with tin filter (80/Sn150 kVp) computed tomography (CT) in oncology patients. Methods One-hundred-and-forty-five consecutive oncology patients who underwent third-generation dual-source dual-energy CT of the abdomen for evaluation of malignant visceral, peritoneal, extraperitoneal, and bone tumor were retrospectively recruited. Two radiologists independently reviewed each observation in 80 kVp CT and 80/Sn150 kVp CT. Modified line-density profile of the tumor and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) were measured. Diagnostic confidence, lesion conspicuity, and subjective image quality were calculated and compared between image sets. The effective dose and size-specific dose estimate (SSDE) were calculated in the image sets. Results Modified line-density profile analysis revealed higher attenuation differences between the tumor and normal tissue in 80 kVp CT than in 80/Sn150 kVp CT (127 vs. 107, P = 0.05). The 80 kVp CT showed increased CNR in the liver (8.0 vs. 7.6) and the aorta (18.9 vs. 16.3) than the 80/Sn150 kVp CT. The 80 kVp CT yielded higher enhancement of organs (4.9 ± 0.2 vs. 4.7 ± 0.4, P<0.001) and lesion conspicuity (4.9 ± 0.3 vs. 4.8 ± 0.5, P = 0.035) than the 80/ Sn150 kVp CT; overall image quality and confidence index were comparable. The effective dose was reduced by 45.2% with 80 kVp CT (2.3 mSv ± 0.9) compared to 80/Sn150 kVp CT

show abstract

Adaptive iterative dose reduction (AIDR) 3D in low dose CT abdomen-pelvis: Effects on image quality and radiation exposure

Cited by 8 publications

References 17 publications

An Improved Method of Automated Noise Measurement System in CT Images

An Improved Method of Automated Noise Measurement System in CT Images

Radiation Doses and Cancer Risk from CT Pulmonary Angiography Examinations

Dual-source abdominopelvic computed tomography: Comparison of image quality and radiation dose of 80 kVp and 80/150 kVp with tin filter

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About